On Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:20 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: > I don't like this driver name at all. For one thing, "pch" is too > short. Many other vendors could come up with names with acronym "PCH". > > For another, Intel has many PCH (Platform Controller Hub) chips, some > of them (5/3400 Series, Cougar Point, Patsburg) are or will be > supported by the i2c-i801 driver, some of them (Moorestown) will be > supported by the upcoming i2c-intel-mid driver (even though the name > "PCH" is surprisingly missing from the source code) and your driver > only supports one particular model. Yes, this driver suppors only Topcliff(Intel Atom E6xx series) now. > > So please find a name which accurately represents the hardware your > driver is for. i2c-topcliff would be fine with me, but you will have to > check with Intel, as I know they are quite picky with the usage of code > names. Most drivers for Topcliff have been accepted with "pch_" prefix. Only SPI driver, like you indicates, have accepted as spi_topcliff_pch.c. If you request, I can modify "pch_i2c.c" to "i2c-topcliff_pch.c". > > As for the driver code, I will not be able to review it, sorry. It's > not in my area, I don't have the time and I don't have the hardware. I > think it would make sense for Intel people to review and test it before > it gets upstream. No problem! After reviewing by Intel(:CCed), we started posting to LKML and we have already tested this patch on the EVA Board. Tuhs, I want you to merge to this patch to 2.6.37 ASAP. Thanks, Tomoya(OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jean Delvare" <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Tomoya" <tomoya-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Wolfram Sang" <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "LKML" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)" <ben-linux@xxxxxxxxx>; "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "srinidhi kasagar" <srinidhi.kasagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Tomoya MORINAGA" <morinaga526@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Wang Qi"" <qi.wang@xxxxxxxxx>; "Wang Yong Y"" <yong.y.wang@xxxxxxxxx>; <kok.howg.ewe@xxxxxxxxx>; <joel.clark@xxxxxxxxx>; <andrew.chih.howe.khor@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH_I2C driver to 2.6.36 > Hi Tomoya, > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:06:09 +0900, Tomoya wrote: > > Could you merge this patch to 2.6.37 ? > > > > Change Summary > > - Change Author > > - Change Name of "Signed-off-by" > > > > Thanks, Tomoya(OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.) > > > > --- > > I2C driver of Topcliff PCH > > > > Topcliff PCH is the platform controller hub that is going to be used in > > Intel's upcoming general embedded platform. All IO peripherals in > > Topcliff PCH are actually devices sitting on AMBA bus. > > Topcliff PCH has I2C I/F. Using this I/F, it is able to access system > > devices connected to I2C. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 8 + > > drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pch.c | 908 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > I don't like this driver name at all. For one thing, "pch" is too > short. Many other vendors could come up with names with acronym "PCH". > > For another, Intel has many PCH (Platform Controller Hub) chips, some > of them (5/3400 Series, Cougar Point, Patsburg) are or will be > supported by the i2c-i801 driver, some of them (Moorestown) will be > supported by the upcoming i2c-intel-mid driver (even though the name > "PCH" is surprisingly missing from the source code) and your driver > only supports one particular model. > > So please find a name which accurately represents the hardware your > driver is for. i2c-topcliff would be fine with me, but you will have to > check with Intel, as I know they are quite picky with the usage of code > names. > > As for the driver code, I will not be able to review it, sorry. It's > not in my area, I don't have the time and I don't have the hardware. I > think it would make sense for Intel people to review and test it before > it gets upstream. > > -- > 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
