Hi Jean, Mark,
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 03:50:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:26:58PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:11:00 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > +static ssize_t show_batt_temp(struct device *dev,
> > > + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
> > > +{
>
> ...
>
> > > + /* The conversion depends on the battery, leave to userspace but
> > > + * report as voltage for ABI reasons. */
> > > + return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(ret, 1000));
> > > +}
>
> > If I am not mistaken, the above function is an exact copy of
> > show_voltage(), so you might as well use it?
>
> It is now, yes, except for the comment explaining why we're reporting as
> a voltage.
>
> > All the rest looks good to me now, so:
>
> > Acked-by: Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org>
>
> > And as I said before for the wm8350-hwmon driver: I can pick this patch
> > and push it to Linux in 2.6.32 if you want, but if you want it to take
> > a different route this is equally fine with me. Just tell me if you
> > want me to pick it.
>
> I'm more than happy for you to take both - the only reason that I asked
> you to hold off on the wm8350 patch originally was that I knew I was
> going to be releasing this driver and there would be collisions with the
> Kconfig stuff which was due to be released very soon.
I applied both patches to my for-next branch. Jean, if you prefer them to go
through your tree, please go ahead and I'll remove them from mine.
Cheers,
Samuel.
--
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
