From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: reorganize muxes to a standard pattern Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2012 15:38:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20120107153820.45ed4b37@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> <20111128125751.3d6a3ca7@endymion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111128125751.3d6a3ca7-R0o5gVi9kd7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Peter Korsgaard , Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Guenter Roeck , Rodolfo Giometti , Michael Lawnick List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:57:51 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > 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. Wolfram, Peter, any progress here? I think Wolfram was supposed to send an updated patch but I did not receive anything. -- Jean Delvare