[i2c] Where do all the patches go?

[Nishanth Menon]

Jean Delvare stated on 5/5/2007 3:44 PM:
> I never heard of CCI nor CSI2... What are you talking about?
>
>   
CSI2 is a MIPI Camera standard.. defines a protocol CCI similar to i2c,
or rather, piggybacks on i2c protocol - with a couple of differences.. I
was stating it in a hypothetical context though..
>> 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
>>     
>
> "Multiple variants of the same" what? What do you mean?
>   
Call it custom i2c lm-sensor  apps, which cater to specific features
that each user wanted.. When i look at it, i would hope, for example,
that when i do i2c_dump i would like to have an option for deciding if
it is multibyte.. i did change it, but did not know how to push back to
community..
I am sure some one else could benefit from that.. some minor things like
that.
>> 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 ;)
>>     
>
> Right now, the i2c tools are in the lm_sensors package. This might not
> be very practical, but this doesn't change anything with regards to the
> above scenario. You'd send a patch against the kernel tree for
> i2c-core, and one against the lm_sensors tree for the tools.
>
>   
Yes, I was not aware that I could send patches of lm_sensor tools to the
list.. Sigh, looks like the option of splitting lm_sensor tools from
i2c_tools may not be feasible in immediate future... :(

Regards,
Nishanth Menon