[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D6B9281.4060700@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:18:09 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
CC: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Bill Gatliff <bgat@...lgatliff.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Generic PWM Device API
On 02/28/11 11:28, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 02/28/11 10:31, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 09:38:38PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote:
>>> Andrew, Linus:
>>>
>>>
>>> The git repository described in the following pull request implements
>>> a generic PWM device driver API. This API is intended to eventually
>>> supercede the existing PWM device drivers, but during a migration
>>> period will coexist peacefully with them.
>>
>> Sorry for the late answer, but it took some time to read the patches
>> again.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to have to APIs for the same thing in the kernel?
>> The old API has users whereas the new API has none. How can we migrate
>> from one API to the other when for example the backlight pwm driver
>> depends on the old API, SoC level drivers implement the old API, but
>> the atmel pwm driver is only available for the new API?
>>
> See the info in Bill's previous postings. He has other drivers queued
> up but wants to break up the review burden by merging this core stuff
> first...
>
Come to think of it, Bill, could you post these at this stage to
show the full benefit of this move?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists