On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 12:51:37 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 06:25:48 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > @@ -818,6 +839,9 @@ static int lm90_detect(struct i2c_client *new_client,
> >
> > static void lm90_remove_files(struct i2c_client *client, struct lm90_data *data)
> > {
> > + if (data->flags & LM90_HAVE_EMERGENCY)
> > + sysfs_remove_group(&client->dev.kobj,
> > + &lm90_emergency_group);
> > if (data->flags & LM90_HAVE_OFFSET)
> > device_remove_file(&client->dev,
> > &sensor_dev_attr_temp2_offset.dev_attr);
>
> But this flag is never set?
Oh, I get it now, it's set in the next patch. That's not OK, each patch
should do something useful in its own right. This suggests that you
have to swap patches 5/7 and 6/7 in the series, first adding a separate
type for the MAX6659, then adding support for the emergency limits.
Or if this is too much work for you, you may decide to merge both
patches (hint: "quilt fold" is quite helpful for this, if you're using
quilt).
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
