From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Curt Brune Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add at24 based EEPROMs to the eeprom_dev hardware class Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 07:05:24 -0800 Message-ID: <20140123150524.GH29955@cumulusnetworks.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Laszlo Papp Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Shrijeet Mukherjee , wolfram@the-dreams.de, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, LKML List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Thu Jan 23 07:44, Laszlo Papp wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Curt Brune wrote: > > During device instantiation have the at24 driver add the new device to > > the eeprom_dev hardware class. The functionality is enabled by > > CONFIG_EEPROM_CLASS. [snip] > > static void __exit at24_exit(void) > > { > > i2c_del_driver(&at24_driver); > > } > > module_exit(at24_exit); > > Couldn't you use module_i2c_driver() instead of this? I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean should the class registration/unregistration be put in module_i2c_driver()? That would not work as not all i2c devices are eeproms. > > > MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Driver for most I2C EEPROMs"); > > MODULE_AUTHOR("David Brownell and Wolfram Sang"); > > I would personally put your name in here if I were you, otherwise > David and Wolfram might get contacted by some people instead of you > (at least based on this). Hmmm. I don't know. I didn't change the driver very much, just added about 10 lines to a perfectly fine driver. git-blame would point right at me for anything to do with this patch. > > PS.: Fixing the broken i2c mailing list typo, and updating Wolfram's > address from the broken (obsolete?) version. Thanks for fixing that. Cheers, Curt