Hi, sorry for the late catch-up on this. On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:25:18PM +0100, Éric Piel wrote: > >> Yes. That is one thing which need to agreed here. One possibility is to > >> implement this as a configurable feature for example using platform data. > >> In that kind of solution default value must be the old way. > > > > Yes please :) > > > Hello, > Actually we had already briefly discussed this with Samu. And I had > given my green light because: > * I don't know any userspace program which would be affected by this > change (they only rely on the relative difference). Arguably, I know > only few programs. Hmm. Maybe I don't understand the change then. I thought the patch will alter the _scale_ of the values to something more standard? If that's the case, also applications that take relative changes will be affected, right? > * Eventually, we should converge to a userspace API compatible with any > accelerometer device and exposed by all the accelerometer drivers. So > for now I consider the userspace interface of the lis3 driver quite > "soft", and any move toward this goal good. > * Having platform data to select between old unit/new unit will add > complexity to the driver, which should be avoided whenever possible. True, and I'm not against dropping legacy. However, if it affects every user space application, we cannot simply change it. I happen to be copied in this thread, so I can react on it, but all other users are not. Anyway, mabye I just didn't fully understand the impact :) Daniel _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
