Re: 2.6.3-mm4

From: Mike Fedyk (mfedyk_at_matchmail.com)
Date: 02/29/04

  • Next message: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: 2.6.3 - 8139too timeout debug info" 
    Date:	Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:51:49 -0800
To: sensors@stimpy.netroedge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

    Jean Delvare wrote:
    >>You have to be kidding me. Are you saying that with your patches to
    >>libsensors it won't support 2.6.3 style sensor sysfs names?
    >
    >
    > Yes I am. This isn't a fundamentally new problem. Each Linux 2.6 has
    > had its matching libsensors version that was not backward compatible
    > (with earlier 2.6 kernels; it's still fully compatible with 2.4).
    >
    > Keeping newer versions of libsensors compatible with all early 2.6
    > kernel versions would make it incredibly more complex, with no
    > significant benefit IMHO.
    >
    > The facts are that the sysfs interface to i2c chips is just stabilizing.
    > Greg's original naming scheme had many drawbacks (also we can't blame
    > him for that, since nobody objected before me), as I have been
    > explaining in a previous post on LKML. Also, many chip drivers did not
    > comply with it in early 2.6 kernels, and new chip drivers wouldn't fit
    > in it anyway.
    >
    > The new interface is required if we want to write a chip-independant
    > libsensors someday. I estimate that this is worth breaking the
    > compatibility. The impacted kernels (later 2.5 and earlier 2.6) will
    > obviously not be used anymore within a short time anyway.
    >
    > I invite you to read my original post here:
    > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=107715308608606
    >
    > I explain the problems of the current interface and my goals with the
    > new one. If you can think of a better solution to the problem, please
    > speak up.

    Working from the premise that there is a current (old-style with mostly
    chip dependent code), libsensors has 2.4 /proc support, and each
    specific release supports one of 2.6.[0123]...

    I'm glad I'm not the maintainer of libsensors for a distribution. Since
    you have effectively pushed the compatibility work to them. Just think
    of angry customer complaints about this. :(

    Since there is going to be an effective libsensors-new library with chip
    independent code, I suggest you put the compat code into the old library.

    Mike
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: 2.6.3 - 8139too timeout debug info"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: 2.6.3-mm4
      ... > libsensors it won't support 2.6.3 style sensor sysfs names? ... had its matching libsensors version that was not backward compatible ... (with earlier 2.6 kernels; it's still fully compatible with 2.4). ... compatibility. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: 2.6.3-mm4
      ... > Since you have effectively pushed the compatibility work to them. ... lm_sensors and Linux kernel, they should be able to handle it quite ... The compatibility problems brought by libsensors are not new. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)