On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:41:57 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 03:36:19PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Darrick, > > > > On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:09:00 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 04:16:13PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > > > > > At the light of all this, I think I'd keep the adt7475 driver and merge > > > > ADT7473 support therein. If anyone can think of good reasons to do it > > > > the other way around, please speak up. > > > > > > Sounds like a good idea to me. > > > > I'll do that then. When I'm done, I'll ask you to test the result, as I > > presume you have access to a live ADT7473 chip. > > > > What about attribute pwm_use_point2_pwm_at_crit? It doesn't sound > > terribly useful to me, but OTOH you did implement it in the adt7473 > > driver, and writable at that, so maybe you had the need. Do you want me > > to add this feature to the adt7475 driver? > > Yes, please. OK, will do. > By the way, will there be any attempt to make > CONFIG_SENSORS_ADT7473 select CONFIG_SENSORS_ADT7475 when the transition is > done? No, CONFIG_SENSORS_ADT7473 will simply be dropped. What could be done is have CONFIG_SENSORS_ADT7473 select CONFIG_SENSORS_ADT7475 _during_ the transition phase, if you think this can be useful. I am a little reluctant to have Kconfig dependencies with no technical justifications, but in this case I can't think of any problem that could cause, so why not. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
