From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: nuc900: remove driver Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 11:07:19 +0200 Message-ID: <5344745.s7ruhXG564@wuerfel> References: <1401654925-20791-1-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1401654925-20791-1-git-send-email-wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Wan ZongShun List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 01 June 2014 22:35:25 Wolfram Sang wrote: > Arnd said in another patch: > > "As far as I can tell, this driver must have produced this > error for as long as it has been merged into the mainline kernel, but > it was never part of the normal build tests: > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nuc900.c: In function 'nuc900_i2c_probe': > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nuc900.c:601:17: error: request for member > 'apbfreq' in something not a structure or union > ret = (i2c->clk.apbfreq)/(pdata->bus_freq * 5) - 1; > ^ > This is an attempt to get the driver to build and possibly > work correctly, although I do wonder whether we should just > remove it, as it has clearly never worked." > > I agree with removing it since nobody showed interest in Arnd's fixup > patch. > > Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang > Cc: Wan ZongShun > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann