From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932525AbWFSQqO (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:46:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932186AbWFSQqO (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:46:14 -0400 Received: from adsl-71-128-175-242.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ([71.128.175.242]:16583 "EHLO build.embeddedalley.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932525AbWFSQqN (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:46:13 -0400 Subject: Re: i2c-algo-ite and i2c-ite planned for removal From: Pete Popov Reply-To: ppopov@embeddedalley.com To: Jean Delvare Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060616222908.f96e3691.khali@linux-fr.org> References: <20060615225723.012c82be.khali@linux-fr.org> <1150406598.1193.73.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060616222908.f96e3691.khali@linux-fr.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Embedded Alley Solutions, Inc Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 19:45:58 +0300 Message-Id: <1150735558.8413.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 22:29 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Pete, > > > > So basically we have two drivers in the kernel tree for 5 years or so, > > > which never were usable, and nobody seemed to care. > > > > For historical correctness, this driver was once upon a time usable, > > though it was a few years ago. It was written by MV for some ref board > > that had the ITE chip and it did work. That ref board is no longer > > around so it's probably safe to nuke the driver. > > In which kernel version? In every version I checked (2.4.12, 2.4.30, > 2.6.0 and 2.6.16) it wouldn't compile due to struct iic_ite being used > but never defined (and possibly other errors, but I can't test-compile > the driver.) Honestly, I don't remember. I think it was one of the very first 2.6 kernels because when MV first released a 2.6 product, 2.6 was still 'experimental'. It's quite possible of course that the driver was never properly merged upstream in the community tree(s). But I do know that it worked in the internal MV tree and an effort was made to get the driver accepted upstream. Pete