[PATCH 1/1] i2c: m41txx driver for ST i2c RTC chips

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:08:56PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> > > > So I'd suggest that you do not rename the driver, it it's not too late.
> > > 
> > > Okay, that makes sense.  I'll change the name back to m41t00 and submit that
> > > patch in the next day or so.
> > 
> > It looks like in the 2.6.16-rc6-mm1 tree I should really be putting the
> > m41t00 driver into drivers/rtc but I need to check if it will work okay
> > for ppc.  In the meantime, here is a patch that keeps it in
> > drivers/i2c/chips.  I hope it is easier to review and is acceptable.
> 
> Yes that's the right way to do it, I think.
> 
> > Replace the old m41t00-specific driver with a more generic driver for
> > the ST family of i2c RTC chips.  Currently, the m41t00, m41t81, and
> > m41t85 chips are supported but only the m41t00 and m41t85 have been
> > tested.
> 
> I still have a problem with your patch (sorry). It's really doing to
> many things at once. Namely, it adds support for new chips, converts
> from tasklet to workqueue, cleans up a few things (e.g. BIN2BCD instead
> of BIN_TO_BCD, which is a good move), and also includes some whitespace
> changes (some of which is NOT OK, please don't attempt to align equal
> signs with spaces in regular code!)

You mean things like the following?

	sec  =  buf[m41t00_chip->sec]  & 0x7f;
	min  =  buf[m41t00_chip->min]  & 0x7f;
	hour = buf[m41t00_chip->hour]  & 0x3f;

I just want to make sure I change the right code.

> I would also object to the configuration symbol change. I think it'll
> be less confusing if you change it when moving the driver to the RTC
> subsystem.

Okay.

> So I'd like you to split this large patch in shorter chunks. The most
> important and urgent one is obviously the tasklet/workqueue
> replacement, as it fixes a bug in -mm (and possibly mainline too). Then
> maybe one patch with all the good cleanups, and a third one adding
> support for the new chips?

Makes sense.

> I know it means more work for you and I'm sorry about that, but it's
> also the only way for me to give proper review to all the changes.

No problem, Jean.  Thanks for the comments.  I'll post the new patches
asap.

Mark




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Hardware Monitoring]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]

  Powered by Linux