OK, fine. I'll look into extending "at24" instead. The only reason I was going with "eeprom" driver here is that it worked just fine (with this diff) for my needs in 2.6.25. And, I thought maybe someone else in the community can benefit from cache bypass as well. -- Petri On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Jean Delvare<khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:45:21 -0700, Petri Gynther wrote: >> In 2.6.25, I used this patch successfully for read-only access to some >> SFP EEPROMs: >> - 0x50 - vendor/part info (caching OK) >> - 0x51 - real-time diagnostics data (caching not OK) >> >> I only care about read-only access to these EEPROMs. And, actually, I >> don't want to provide write access at all. >> >> In 2.6.31, I'd like to continue using this same legacy driver for SFP >> EEPROM access, with the option of bypassing the cache. > > This is not going to happen, sorry. "eeprom" is a legacy driver and we > certainly don't want to enhance it in any way. The "at24" driver is > much easier to extend as it was designed that way from the ground up. > You can add a SFP EEPROM type to it (whatever it is) and have the > driver automatically set the access to read-only and the caching > strategy for each part of the EEPROM. > > I'm curious, why do you insist on using the eeprom driver? > > -- > 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
