On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 02:34:57PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > 1* What is the different between "normal" i2c addresses and "probe" > i2c addresses? It seems that both arrays are treated the same way, and > no client driver is using "probe" addresses (at a quick glance at > least.) Can't we just get rid of it? Yes we should. I've started to look at how to reduce the number of things in the per-driver structure and this is one that will go away soon (along with the ranges, but that's for another email...) > 2* What is the difference between i2c_probe in i2c-core and i2c_detect in > i2c-sensor (i2c-proc in 2.4)? Both functions seem to be very similar, I > couldn't find a difference (but I admittedly did not compare line by > line yet). If there are, it's probably not worth the code duplication. > As a matter of fact, I don't see how exactly i2c_detect is supposed to > be sensor-related. Can't we get rid of i2c_detect and use i2c_probe > everywhere? Yes we can, if we merge the two structures properly. Right now they aren't alike in a very tiny way. Any patches to fix all of this up would be greatly appreciated so that I can mark another thing off of my todo list :) > It would be great if we could clean this mess now because I will do > significant changes to that part of the code soon (to get rid of the > thinkpad breakage issue, just like I did in the userspace tools already). > > I admit that I find it a little strange that two things so obviously > redundant could have been in place for so long and nobody ever objected. > Am I missing something? I've always noticed them, but in the 2.6 push to get stable, I ignored them as it will take a bit of work to fix them up. thanks, greg k-h
