Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Juerg, > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:52:45 -0700, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > >> Wow, sure a lot of unused junk. The patch looks good but doesn't apply >> cleanly over the revised patch 02/10. Could you please refresh and >> resend it? >> > > Sure, here you go: > > Drop a lot of useless register defines, conversion macros, data structure > members and update code. All these register values were read from the > device but nothing is done out of them, so this is all dead code in > practice. > The code to use all of those registers was posted in 2004: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2004-August/008563.html But was apparently not picked up because there was an objection to the size of the patch? The patch was streamlined to try and match the "standard" for PWM control (which doesn't map to the LM85 registers very well) and reposted: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2004-September/009059.html but without the additional functionality unfortunately. Wouldn't the better course of action be to add the accessors for these tuneables rather than remove the functionality from the driver? Of course, that means that I probably need to do the work, but I don't have the time to do this right now. So could I ask that we *not* remove this "dead" code, but leave it in for now so that when someone does get around to adding the accessor functions, they won't have to submit a patch to reverse this "dead" code elimination? Thanks, Phil P -- Philip Pokorny, RHCE, Chief Arch. & Sr. Dir. HW & Field Eng. Tel: 415-954-2823 Cell: 415-370-0835 Fax: 415-954-2899 Toll Free: 888-PENGUIN PENGUIN COMPUTING, INC. www.penguincomputing.com
