On Sunday 27 July 2003 03:25 am, you wrote:
> > i2c-alpha.patch just includes Oleg's i2c-elektor fixes (the
> > i2c-velleman fix has already made it to CVS).
>
> I need Oleg's confirmation that this apply to Linux 2.4 as
> well as 2.6. (An explanation of why the change is needed would
> be welcome too).
Hmmm...my impression is that it enables the driver to work with
newer kernels. Just looking at the asm-${ARCH}/io.h header
files from 2.4.20, there are some comments about plans to rip
out certain relevant parts in 2.5/2.6, but I don't run 2.5/2.6,
so I couldn't tell you exactly what's happened there. You'd
have to ask Oleg exactly what the patch fixes.
> I agree for all fixes but one. You include <linux/slab.h> in
> i2c-savage4.c while I think <asm/param.h> should be sufficent.
> Do you confirm?
I confirm, ja. I don't know how I missed that, but <asm/param.h>
is indeed sufficient.
> > For now, i2c-tsunami build targets are commented out in
> > kernel/busses/Module.mk. They should be re-enabled when the
> > driver works again.
>
> I'd by far prefer a real fix... So we won't comment it out for
> now. We will do so before releasing 2.8.1 if no fix has been
> proposed at this time. If CVS testers don't notice it fails
> compiling, why would one want it to be fixed?
Fair enough. :)
--
Kelledin
"If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does
it still cost four figures to fix?"
