On 24-06-08 08:59, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:07:15 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Robert Hancock wrote: >>> Mark M. Hoffman wrote: >>>> 2) This patch is broken. >>> You didn't indicate what was wrong with the patch. >> Yes. Leaving everybody wondering whether it's just an opinionated >> expression of the former problem, or whether there is a real and >> understandable reason why it was NACK'ed. > > I guess Mark assumed that everybody had read the discussion thread Rene > referenced, where I explained why his patch was broken: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/23/175 You could've known that he himself didn't because in that same thread I explained to you why it wasn't broken in actual real life. That said, I agree that with the issue of multiple thermal zones sharing a single hwmon interface (as also indicated in the changelog) it's not a nice solution. Len Brown also indicated that the "make it optional" patch (originally nacked as ugly by Hans, which was the only reason I tried getting you people something else again...) that I saw Zhang Rui repost just now would be better than that. And, as said, now that lm-sensors 2.10.7 is close, I don't actually think it's a huge deal anymore anyway. The breakage is still pretty unfortunate, but that one should be painless enough as an upgrade to shrug this off really. It was the upgrade path to 3.x which would've been much too painful to have this done without any prior warning. So we're waiting for 2.10.7 now. Rene.
