Hi Jean,
Oops, there was a signed off line in the first e-mail to the mailing
list and I'd just assumed it was still in the forward. I will port the
patch to the latest mm-series tonight and repost.
We should write all this stuff down somewhere :-) (cc Greg, post
in-line even over 40k, patch against latest mm etc) for newbies like
me, unless I'm missing some existing documentation somewhere (I read
the kernel documentation, Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and the
lm_sensors porting_clients documentation, etc).
Thanks,
Yani
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:37:48 +0200 (CEST), Jean Delvare
<khali at linux-fr.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Yani,
>
> > Greg has asked me to send it in-line to the list, so here it is :).
> > I'd appreciate any comments on the patch, please read the previous
> > threads on the sysfs callback problem first though.
>
> Please provide your patch against the latest -mm tree. This is where the
> latest i2c developments are. Your current patch doesn't apply against
> 2.6.12-rc1-mm3 (fails on drivers/i2c/chips/Makefile).
>
> Note that i2c_client.id is no more, so this won't work:
>
> +struct i2c_client bmc_client = {
> + .name = "bmc",
> + .id = 1, /* fake should be 0 */
> + .flags = 0,
> + .addr = 0,
> + .adapter = NULL, /* adapter */
> + .driver = &bmcsensors_driver,
> + .usage_count = 0
> +};
>
> And this won't work either, of course:
>
> + bmc_client.id = 0;
>
> Why is bmc_client no declared static?
>
> Could you please explain to us what i2c-ipmi does? I understand it acts
> as an interface between the bmcsensors driver and something else, but I
> yet have to learn what that other thing is, and why an interface is
> needed at all. As I understand it, i2c-ipmi is no I2C or SMBus master
> driver, but a kind of hack much like the i2c-isa driver is. I don't
> exactly enjoy the way i2c-isa works, and I plan to get rid of it at some
> point in time (hopefully in a near future), so let's not do something
> equally ugly here.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Jean Delvare
>
