From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] misc: Add Tunnel creek In-Vehicle I2C loader driver Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:30:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20101015123017.GL14782@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <1283956897.4593.12.camel@debian> <4CA2FB10.2020605@pelagicore.com> <20101015104902.1047c978@endymion.delvare> <20101015121042.GA27369@sirena.org.uk> <20101015142130.1cf14629@endymion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101015142130.1cf14629-R0o5gVi9kd7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: Richard Rojfors , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 02:21:30PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > My point still holds, regardless of what exactly Intel has in the > works: if board config is now needed on some x86 systems, then support > for it should be added in the same way other architectures did before. > I can't see any reason why x86 would be different. Oh, absolutely - I'm just saying that the existing Intel work isn't useful for this as it's tied to Moorestown and SFI.