On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > No. You are just paraphrasing, this doesn't help. I need an explanation > > of the _functional_ changes implemented by the patch. I don't care much > > that these changes come from the omap tree, I don't know anything about > > this tree. What I need to know is why the changes are needed by > > themselves. What problem(s) does this patch address? > > otherwise the driver won't work on board-h3, simple enough
But the reason those changes were never pushed upstream is that they were known to break board-h2 !! I was never keen on merging them into the OMAP tree in the first place, specifically for that reason ... the original idea was to merge patches that worked on *both* chip revisions. Failing that, to follow up the H3 patches with bugfixes; those fixes never got submitted. So for what it's worth, I'll NAK those state machine updates. On the grounds that they *add* bugs. H3 doesn't work in the mainline tree yet, so there's no way such a patch could ever be viewed as an improving anything whatsoever for mainline. _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
