From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: "Gaston, Jason D" <jason.d.gaston@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ICH6/6300ESB i2c support
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 22:57:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040513225740.28501501.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26CEE2C804D7BE47BC4686CDE863D0F5B1C46A@orsmsx410.jf.intel.com>
> The reason I have the renumbering in pci_ids.h and the new device
> support in i2c-i801 in the same patch, is that the new device support
> is dependent on the devices being added to pci_ids.h. However, if it
> is the consensus that these be two separate patches, I can separate
> them.
I think it's better to split because the first patch (renumbering) seems
to be a good thing even if the second patch were not to be applied.
Experience proves that individual patches that do just one thing are
more likely to be accepted quickly than big ones, thus my advice.
> As far as using the ICHx model name is concerned; I can not use the
> model name "82801xx" until after the product has launched. I have
> also seen requests to use the ICHx name rather then the model number.
> Again, if it is the consensus, I can go back after the product
> launches and change all of the #defines, for the device, to use the
> model number rather than the "common" name.
That won't be needed. If you have good reasons for your choice, it's
fine with me. I was just wanting to avoid a policy change without a
reason. Since you know why you changed, it's OK (with me at least).
> I will look into providing the same patch for the 2.4 kernel.
Thanks :)
--
Jean Delvare
http://khali.linux-fr.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-13 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-13 19:46 [PATCH] ICH6/6300ESB i2c support Gaston, Jason D
2004-05-13 20:57 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-05-13 8:05 Jean Delvare
2004-05-12 19:52 jdgaston
2004-05-14 21:59 ` Greg KH
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040513225740.28501501.khali@linux-fr.org \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=jason.d.gaston@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox