[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190906161215.GA10547@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 18:12:15 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eeprom: Deprecate the legacy eeprom driver
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 04:50:04PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 09:57:29 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 10:48:38AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Time has come to get rid of the old eeprom driver. The at24 driver
> > > should be used instead. So mark the eeprom driver as deprecated and
> > > give users some time to migrate. Then we can remove the legacy
> > > eeprom driver completely.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
> > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig | 5 ++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > You might also want to add a big printk() message when the driver is
> > loaded that it shouldn't be used.
>
> Good idea, although unfortunately this means expanding
> module_i2c_driver. Or maybe I can use printk_once() in eeprom_probe().
> Or even just a dev_warn() there to really spam the kernel log in a very
> visible way.
What ever you want is fine with me.
> Would you prefer a v2 of this patch including that change, or a
> separate, incremental patch?
An incremental patch as I've already applied this one.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists