linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] I2C: SIS964: Bus driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 3 Aug 2012 18:36:36 +0200
From:	Amaury Decrême <amaury.decreme@...il.com>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Cc:	ben-linux@...ff.org, w.sang@...gutronix.de, rob@...dley.net,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, joe@...ches.com,
	ralf@...ux-mips.org, dirk.brandewie@...il.com,
	jayachandranc@...logicmicro.com, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] I2C: SIS964: Bus driver

Hi Jean,

>
> What is the rationale for not adding support for the new chip to
> i2c-sis630 then? That would probably be a lot easier to review.
>

I was afraid that adding SIS964 support to i2c-sis630 would lead
to confusion.

I can try to submit a patch for i2c-sis630. In this case, do you think
we should keep the 630 name or change it to something else to
avoid misunderstanding ?


>
> This split makes little sense. Integration should come with the driver,
> otherwise even build-testing is impossible.
>

Sorry for that. As the patch V1 was rather big, I was hesitating for
the same reason but posted it split. I'll "unsplit" for the V3 (unless
i2c-sis630 patch).


Amaury Decrême
--
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/