Hi Eric: > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 16:33, Mark M. Hoffman wrote: > > CVS/lm93.c, line 450: > > > > result = i2c_smbus_read_block_data(client, > > > > Your patch, at the equivalent place: > > > > result = i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(client, > > > > Those two aren't synonyms - you changed the transaction type. Why? * Eric J. Bowersox <ericb at aspsys.com> [2005-08-02 17:08:45 -0600]: > Well, for one thing, the function i2c_smbus_read_block_data doesn't seem > to exist anymore, though its twin, i2c_smbus_write_block_data, does. > (See: include/linux/i2c.h, lines 99-103, in 2.6.13-rc3-mm3.) > > You're right that there is a difference in the underlying > implementations, but the old (and presumably correct, in this instance) > function appears to have been removed sometime between 2.6.5 and > 2.6.13-rc3-mm3. Anyone have any idea why that was done? As a Yes, I remembered that just as your message was coming in. It was removed because there were no in-kernel users, so it was considered bloat. > workaround, should I basically create my own implementation of the old > i2c_smbus_read_block_data by calling i2c_smbus_xfer myself? No, please create a separate patch that puts it back into i2c-core where it belongs. > > (You also reminded me that i2c-i801.c in 2.6.x should get synced up > > a bit with its twin in lm-sensors CVS. I'll do that later.) > > Yeah, in particular, in the "prochot" reporting, I noticed that you > seemed to be reporting the "average" return value twice. In > kernel/chips/lm93.c, lines 1113-1115, it reads: > [...] I really meant the i2c-i801 driver, not the lm93. But, if you found some bug in CVS/lm93.c then by all means send me a patch and I'll commit it. I still haven't been able to review your port closely yet, sorry. Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman at lightlink.com
