From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] i2c: Get rid of the legacy binding model Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 12:14:02 -0700 Message-ID: <200905021214.02937.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <20090502113856.39940f1e@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090502113856.39940f1e-ig7AzVSIIG7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: Linux I2C List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 02 May 2009, Jean Delvare wrote: > =A0Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt | =A0 10 - > =A0Documentation/i2c/writing-clients =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0| =A0 16 - > =A0drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0= 366 +++-------------------------- > =A0include/linux/i2c.h =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= | =A0 57 +---- Which makes all but patch #4 *very* easy to review. All they do is remove code. Unless that breaks a build, those removals have a hard time making any trouble. ;) > =A04 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 401 deletions(-) >=20 > From a binary perspective, "size" announces an 18% shrink. And Linux now builds without all those warnings, yes? Plus from a code complexity perspective, it's even better ... it removes 100% of the high level confusion associated with that legacy model, and the bugs and fragility caused by that. (Or maybe I should say that it *finishes* removing that.) Glad to see this. I presume this will sit in -next for a while and merge in 2.6.31-early? - Dave