From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: reorganize muxes to a standard pattern Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:57:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20111128125751.3d6a3ca7@endymion.delvare> References: <1321220474-11378-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <20111127214847.547542fb@endymion.delvare> <87sjl9gtcv.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <20111128092227.3d5d6a25@endymion.delvare> <20111128093835.GA4243@pengutronix.de> <874nxoh8l5.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <874nxoh8l5.fsf-uXGAPMMVk8amE9MCos8gUmSdvHPH+/yF@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Peter Korsgaard Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Guenter Roeck , Rodolfo Giometti , Michael Lawnick , Peter Korsgaard List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:58:30 +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote: > >>>>> "Wolfram" == Wolfram Sang writes: > > >> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.i2c/7171/focus=7244 > >> > >> Ah, yes, that's the discussion I was looking for, thanks for digging it > >> out. My point wasn't totally wrong back then, but Wolfram's is simply > >> better, I admit. > > Wolfram> I agree :) Okay, so I'll update the documentation as well. What about > Wolfram> include/linux/gpio-i2cmux.h and its users? I'd like consistency, but > Wolfram> renaming header files is not too nice... > > Indeed. If we were to rename it we should also rename struct > gpio_i2cmux_platform_data. > > I don't feel strongly about it - It will break for existing users, but > there's probably not too many of those. Your call. I see exactly 1 user of in the upstream kernel tree, and that is gpio-i2cmux itself. So I'd say no big deal renaming it, and actually if we intend to rename header files and/or structures, the sooner the better. -- Jean Delvare