Hi Mauro, On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:41:33 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:51:10 +0100 > Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > There's no point in rescheduling. If we patiently wait for an API to > > become unused before we remove it, there's no point to announce a > > version when the API will be removed in the first palce, and there's a > > risk that the removal will never happen. The whole point of announcing > > a version is that developers can prepare for it and we stick to what we > > announced (as much as possible). > > > > Really, I don't think 2.6.30 is unrealistic. Hans has done a huge work > > already for the v4l side. > > True. Thanks to Hans, most of drivers were converted. > > > I have done my part on hwmon, and Alessandro > > Zummo on rtc. Getting the remainder done within a few weeks sounds > > totally possible _if_ we can drop support kernels < 2.6.22 from the > > v4l-dvb repository. This has already been discussed... There are i2c > > subsystem fixes and improvements which many people have asked for which > > depend on this. > > The issue is not related to drop support for < 2.6.22, but to finish porting > the I2C adapters that use those I2C drivers, and test they with the several > different supported i2c combinations. It is related, indirectly, because it is the same developers who can work on finishing driver conversions and who take care of the v4l-dvb repository. The time spent on compatibility issues (which happen to be difficult to deal with for kernels < 2.6.22) is not spent on fixing and testing upstream drivers. Not to mention that the code for pre-2.6.22 kernels would be so different that it would need to be tested separately, in effect doubling the amount of testing required. Hans made a poll some weeks ago with regards to the interest developers and users have in supporting pre-2.6.22 kernels and the results were pretty clear: this is something almost nobody is interested in. So I am curious, what are we waiting for before we drop support these old kernels? > On a first glance, it seems that we still need to port bttv, cafe-ccic, cx23885, > em28xx, cx88 and pvrusb2. > > Those drivers responds for the majority number of different TV capture boards > in the market. > > I know that Hans is working with bttv driver, and asked other developers to > help on this task. > > It is still a huge job, due to the number of different I2C variants that each > card have, the need for tests with several different I2C configurations and the > lack of information we have about a large number of the supported cards. > > Doing this conversion without care and enough testing will for sure generate > regressions. Yes, I agree. I can help test bttv (2 adapters) and cx88 (one adapter). -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
