Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
Hi Bruce, I just sent out the v2 patch files, please review. Thanks, Yong 2016-05-31 12:36 GMT+08:00 Bruce Ashfield: > 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 : >>> >>> 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 : >> >> >> >> 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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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: 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 : 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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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" Thanks, Yong 2016-05-31 2:22 GMT+08:00 Bruce Ashfield: > 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 : 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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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: 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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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. Sau! > Thanks, > Yong > > 2016-05-27 23:51 GMT+08:00 Saul Wold: > > > > 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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name
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 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