Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:32:10 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> As you all know I've been working lately on moving the fscher driver to >> individual alarm files and on merging the fscpos driver into the fscher driver. >> >> While typing a reply to Jean's review of the fscpos support for the fscher >> driver, I came to the conclusion that it might be best to remove the watchdog >> supporting sysfs attr from these 2 drivers, These sysfs attr are nothing more >> then a raw export of the watchdog registers. If people want raw access they can >> and should use i2c-dev. Thus I think it would best to just remove the watchdog >> sysfs attr, reducing the driver size and complexity. > > (Repeating what I wrote in another thread, as this new thread is a > better place:) > Yes, I saw your reply there too, but this whole discussion has got kinda obsoleted by the fscscy driver also getting into the picture. > I agree that the current watchdog implementation is poor, but you can't > rip it away right now without offering a replacement. Either deprecate > it and plan it for removal at a later point in time, or replace it with > a proper implementation (or both.) > I understand that compatibility is important. Since with some bad sysfs api decisions were made in the whole fscxxx series, my plan is now to do a new driver called fscxxx without any of the baggage, and once that is reviewed an in the kernel mark the entire fscher and fscpos driver as obsolete. Regards, Hans
