On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 11:03:22PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > Quoting myself: > > > (...) Greg, could > > you please apply the following patch to the "porting-clients" document > > so that at least the new drivers don't need to be converted > > afterwards? > > > > Documentation/i2c/porting-clients | 5 ++++- > > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff -Nru a/Documentation/i2c/porting-clients b/Documentation/i2c/porting-clients > > --- a/Documentation/i2c/porting-clients Mon Jan 19 15:33:17 2004 > > +++ b/Documentation/i2c/porting-clients Mon Jan 19 15:33:17 2004 > > @@ -92,7 +92,10 @@ > > i2c_get_clientdata(client) instead. > > > > * [Interface] Init function should not print anything. Make sure > > - there is a MODULE_LICENSE() line. > > + there is a MODULE_LICENSE() line. MODULE_PARM() is replaced > > + by module_param(). Note that module_param has a third parameter, > > + that you should set to 0 by default. See > > include/linux/moduleparam.h+ for details. > > > > Coding policy: > > On second thought I think I shouldn't have done that change. I2c chip > drivers use SENSORS_INSMOD_* macros which in the end include > MODULE_PARM() calls. > > Quoting Rusty Russell: "However, I never implemented mixing old > and new style in the same module, so if you're adding a parameter, it > makes sense to convert them all." > > So maybe I shouldn't suggest that new drivers use the new style, since > they will mix old and new in this case. What about forgetting about that > doc change for now? Sorry for the trouble, I should have thought about > that before submitting. Heh, feel free to port the SENSORS_INSMOD_* crap too if you want to. I really hate that code, and want to drop it entirely in 2.7 if possible... Or just send me a patch, backing out your change, I'll apply that :) thanks, greg k-h
