From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754160AbZHLQJK (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:09:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753945AbZHLQJJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:09:09 -0400 Received: from ppsw-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.131]:35624 "EHLO ppsw-1.csi.cam.ac.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753885AbZHLQJI (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:09:08 -0400 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <4A8294DD.3080205@cam.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:09:33 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: LKML , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: RFC: Merge strategy for Industrial I/O (staging?) References: <4A828AE9.9090807@cam.ac.uk> <20090812155101.GA30629@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20090812155101.GA30629@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:27:05AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> IIO is intended to be a subsystem for sensors such as ADCs, accelerometers, >> gyros, light sensors and others that have reasonably high update rates and >> typically are connected via i2c or spi busses. >> >> The latest patch set posted to lkml was v4 >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/860693 >> Tree at >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio_v4.git;a=summary >> >> original discussion of the need for such a subsystem: >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/5/20/135 >> >> The last couple of versions of IIO have recieved some useful feedback from >> a number of people, and feedback from various users has led to a number >> of recent bug fixes. Unfortunately, full reviews of any given element have >> not be forthcoming. Several people who have in principle offered to help >> haven't had the time as yet. >> >> In the short term, the lack of review of the core (patch 1 of the above set) >> leads to a stack of device drivers sitting in the git repository waiting on >> the core being merged. Currently in the tree there are 3 accelerometers, an >> adc and a light sensor. I also have an IMU driver (ADIS16350 family) that >> needs a little more cleaning up and testing with latest IIO core. >> >> Increasing numbers of drivers that would fall within the scope of IIO are >> being submitted to various other subsystems (hwmon for example) and getting >> bounced out as inappropriate for that subsystem. So, whilst I'd be reasonably >> happy to maintain the subsystem out of kernel until interest in the devices >> covered grows, or people have time to assist, I was wondering whether it >> would be appropriate to submit the subsystem and the associated driver >> set to staging. >> >> Whilst some elements could definitely do with more work (for example the >> use of rtc's to get periodic timers, is clunky at best), much of the core >> and the actual device drivers are to my mind pretty clean. So the question >> is, 'Is lack of reviewers a valid reason to submit to staging in the meantime?' > > Yes, I have no objection to taking these patches in staging for now, as > long as you submit it with a TODO list of things left to be done to get > it merged to the main portion of the kernel tree. > > So, send me the patches! Will do, thanks. Jonathan