On 2016-05-30 11:38 PM, Yong Li wrote:
Hi Bruce,
The
Upstream-Status:Submitted[http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-iio/msg24331.html]
for more information, please visit
https://github.com/ostroproject/meta-ostro-bsp/pull/34
without this patch, the device I2C name is mismatch with the IIO name:
root@intel-corei7-64:/sys/bus/i2c/devices/1-0040# cat name
tmp006
root@intel-corei7-64:/sys/bus/i2c/devices/1-0040# cat iio\:device0/name
1-0040
Sensor framework(Soletta) will use this name, the name "tmp006" is
much better than the "X-0040"
That looks fine to me .. can you resend the patch as a v2 with
that in the commit message ? I can then merge it directly from
that version.
Bruce
Thanks,
Yong
2016-05-31 2:22 GMT+08:00 Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com>:
On 2016-05-28 09:50 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
On Sat, 2016-05-28 at 12:34 +0800, Yong Li wrote:
Hi Bruce Saul,
I had submitted the patches into Kernel mail list, the concern is the
legacy application compatibility:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-iio/index.html#24331
For the Ostro OS, Using Soletta framrwork, we have tested/verified
more more than 30 different I2C
devices(https://ostroproject.org/documentation/hardware/sensors.html)
.
But only the two devices have incorrect device names(the IIO name
does
not match the I2C device name). QA team think it is a bug
So is it possible to fix the test in this case to correctly handle the
legacy naming rather than make it fail? I guess the concern here is if
we "fix" the name, we will really break the legacy applications. It's
possible for those application to run in Ostro also and since Ostro is
newer, it would break those rather than the other way around.
Any update on this ? I can merge the change to standard/intel, but
if we do that, I'd like to update the commit logs to show the upstream
submission, and explain that why this use case prefers to make the
names match (versus the upstream compatibility argument).
That way, we'll know to carry the patch and not try to re-submit it
upstream later.
Bruce
Sau!
Thanks,
Yong
2016-05-27 23:51 GMT+08:00 Saul Wold <s...@linux.intel.com>:
On Fri, 2016-05-27 at 10:24 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On 2016-05-27 12:58 AM, Yong Li wrote:
Dear Maintainers,
This patch fixes the “incorrect IIO device name” issue.
Please merge it into standard/base branch for linux-yocto-4.4
if
this looks okay.
The change looks technically correct, just a question about if
these
are also going upstream to the mainline kernel.
Bruce,
These are possibly candidates for the standard/intel branch,
they where proposed upstream and deemed correct, but not merge-able
due
to creating incompatible names.
Yong Li,
What is requiring the name change in Ostro, why can't Ostro
use the existing incorrect, but compatible name?
Sau!
Bruce
Thanks
Yong Li
Yong Li (2):
iio: tmp006: Set correct iio name
iio: si7020: Set correct iio name
drivers/iio/humidity/si7020.c | 2 +-
drivers/iio/temperature/tmp006.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
_______________________________________________
linux-yocto mailing list
linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto
