On Wed, 21 May 2008 09:30:59 +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Dave Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> ... but calling another one? Can't be correct. Which raises a question: > >> you didn't test your patch, did you? I'm also surprised how you managed > >> to mess this up, given that all you had to do was to move already > >> existing code around. > > > > Thanks for review, It's only boot-tested with i2c part as built-in by > > me because I have the i2c device to test. > > should be "have no the i2c device to test" ;)
Too late for this time, but for next time, you can emulate an i2c device using the i2c-stub driver, that's very convenient when you want to test a change that affects i2c and don't have any physical device to test it. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
