Re: [PATCH] OMAP: I2C driver for TI OMAP boards #2

On Monday 31 July 2006 9:13 am, Jean Delvare wrote:
Hi David,

And I **really** hope this gets merged into 2.6.18 since virtually
no OMAP board is very usable without it. I2C is one of the main
missing pieces(*) ... can whoever's managing I2C merges please
expedite this?

It doesn't work like this, sorry. The merge window for 2.6.18 is
closed. The driver needs to be reviewed before it is merged. So the
best you can hope for is -mm soon, and 2.6.19.

So there's been a change from the "new drivers can be merged late"
policy? News to me if so. Not that this is a particularly new
driver of course, or at all unstable.


I just tried building an OSK config against RC3 and found at least
five will-not-build errors in the kernel.org tree. The reason for
this is basically that folk have no option except the linux-omap
tree, since there's no point in trying to use the kernel.org version
until the I2C driver finally gets merged ... so such bugs won't get
fixed. Needless to say, this is not the desired development process.

Indeed, this is no good. If you want things to improve, please help by
reviewing Komal's driver. I think I understand you already commented on
it, but I'd like you to really review it, and add a formal approval to
it (e.g. Signed-off-by or Acked-by). Then I'll review it for merge.

Review it again? I'll try to make some time to help there, but
it's unlikely I'll notice significant issues that seem to me
worth holding up the upstream merge. Certainly none that make
up for the problems caused by having the kernel.org tree be all
but unusable for OMAP work, and couldn't be patched later.


(*) I submitted the then-current I2C driver over a year ago, but
after a few months of inaction I found that it was dropped
(or rejected?) by the I2C list software. Of course at that
point I no longer had time to resubmit the current code ...

Neither dropped nor rejected, as I received it and it shows in the
archive as well:
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-August/013216.html
The reason why it was "ignored" is more likely a lack of time and/or
interest.

What is the relation between your "old" driver

Not "my" driver at all; I'm not even on the copyright list, and
maybe the biggest change I did was the platform_driver conversion.
(If that; I don't recall, but I converted a lot of drivers around
that time and I think I probably did that one too.)


and the new one Komal is
submitting now? Evolution, or rewrite?

Evolution. I see support for the new OMAP2 parts (ARMv6) and maybe
the clock framework stuff is new; plus as you know the I2C framework
has collected simplifications and updates.

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

Relevant Pages