From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:41345 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755138Ab2AYBC1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 20:02:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:02:26 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, Wim Van Sebroeck Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/3] watchdog: new driver for STMP3xxx/MX23/MX28 Message-Id: <20120124170226.fa6386a1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1327347185-620-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> References: <1327347185-620-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:33:02 +0100 Wolfram Sang wrote: > The first patch adds an accessor routine to the RTC-driver which can hopefully > go via the watchdog-tree as well (asking for Andrew's ack here). The second > patch adds the new driver, the third removes the old one. I had a few little issues. > After missing the last merge window, I really hope we can get it into 3.4. The > old driver was broken (= not compilable) anyhow, so there cannot be any > regression. Tested on a MX28EVK. Well, people out could still be using the old driver after applying local fixups. How compatible is the new driver with the old one? Same module parameters? Will it just transparently work? IOW, if people out there are using the old driver now, how much will this sudden removal impact them?