On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 03:11:14PM -0500, Jean Delvare wrote: [ ... ] > > > > Not sure if you can do that, given the close interrelation with lis3lv02d.c. > > I was a little worried about this at first, but then noticed that the > string is (almost) only used as the name of the acpi driver and device. > The lis3lv02d core driver doesn't deal with ACPI at all, so it > shouldn't make a difference. Also, the lis3lv02d_i2c and lis3lv02d_spi > drivers do have different driver name strings, which implies that there > is no requirement for a common driver name string. > > > That really asks for testing on a real system. > > I agree still. The only problem I can think of is if user-space expects > a specific ACPI driver and/or device name. Note that, in the event this > one patch causes trouble, I'll simply drop it. I noticed what I think > is an improper driver name while working on the driver, but what I > really care about is moving these drivers out of drivers/hwmon, i.e. > the first 3 patches of the set. > Makes sense. Still, Acked-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
