From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 20:21:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 20:21:44 -0500 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]:51902 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 20:21:43 -0500 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 17:23:07 -0800 From: Greg KH To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sensors@stimpy.netroedge.com Subject: i2c_probe() vs i2c_detect() Message-ID: <20030403012307.GA6037@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all, Can anyone tell me why both i2c_probe() and i2c_detect() are in the kernel at the same time? They both almost do the same thing, with the exception being i2c_detect() can handle i2c devices on the isa bus. It kind of looks like the older i2c code and drivers used the i2c_probe() call, while the lm_sensors code used i2c_detect(). If there are no objections, I'll merge the two of them, cutting about 2k out of the kernel :) thanks, greg k-h