From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261509AbVFBElp (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 00:41:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261527AbVFBElo (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 00:41:44 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:20194 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261509AbVFBEln (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 00:41:43 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 21:51:45 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Mark M. Hoffman" Cc: dmitry pervushin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lm-sensors Subject: Re: [RFC] SPI core Message-ID: <20050602045145.GA7838@kroah.com> References: <1117555756.4715.17.camel@diimka.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20050531233215.GB23881@kroah.com> <20050602040655.GE4906@jupiter.solarsys.private> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050602040655.GE4906@jupiter.solarsys.private> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 12:06:55AM -0400, Mark M. Hoffman wrote: > * Greg KH [2005-05-31 16:32:15 -0700]: > > This code is _very_ close to just a copy of the i2c core code. Why > > duplicate it and not work with the i2c people instead? > > It was discussed briefly on the lm-sensors mailing list [1]. I didn't > reply at the time, but I do agree that SPI and I2C/SMBus are different > enough to warrant independent subsystems. Independant is fine. But direct copies, including making the same mistakes (i2c dev interface, i2c driver model mess) isn't :) thanks, greg k-h