[i2c] Where do all the patches go?

[Nishanth Menon]

Hi Jean,

Jean Delvare stated on 5/5/2007 11:17 AM:
> Comments welcome.
>   
Thanks. This looks good to me. :)
> I don't really understand what you mean here, sorry.
>
> I've been thinking of splitting away the i2c tools to a separate
> package, but then there's a problem with isadump, which isn't related
> to i2c, but isn't specific to lm_sensors either. Having a separate
> package just for isadump sounds overkill. And i2cdump and isadump share
> some code (a small amount.) But maybe it'll happen; I wonder what
> the others think.
>   
yes - the idea is to have i2c test apps as a seperate set for folks like
me to play around. To give an example: I have been thinking of
integrating multibyte CCI transfer (CSI2 variant of i2c) and wanted to
modify the i2c core for this (hypothetically). I should be able to
present two patches: one for the driver/core; the second for the
test-tool used to test the functionality. this way all of us can be on
the same page - instead of multiple variants of the same. Ofcourse, I
agree that the number of patches coming in for the test tool is going to
be small - given thier generic nature, but it is a nice place to look
for... that is my two cents ;)
> For now the main objective is to remove all the kernel code from the
> lm_sensors package and drop all the Linux 2.4 support.
>   
yes, that is needed true and necessary...

Regards,
Nishanth Menon