Re: [PATCH RFC] eeprom: at24: extend driver to plug into the NVMEM framework

[Srinivas Kandagatla]

On 17/08/15 14:09, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 02:01:24PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> > +Adding Maxime in the loop
> >
> > On 16/08/15 16:37, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> > > > > Another question which spring to mind is, do we want the eeprom to be
> > > > > in /sys twice, the old and the new way? Backwards compatibility says
> > > > > the old must stay. Do we want a way to suppress the new? Or should we
> > > > > be going as far as refractoring the code into a core library, and two
> > > > > wrapper drivers, old and new?
> > > I think these are questions for the framework maintainers.
> > One of the reasons for the NVMEM framework is to remove that
> > duplicate code in the every driver.  There was no framework/ABI
> > which was guiding such old eeprom sysfs entry in first place, so I
> > dont see an issue in removing it for good. Correct me if am wrong.
>
> The reason for keeping it is backwards compatibility. Having the
> contents of the EEPROM as a file in /sys via this driver is now a part
> of the Linux ABI. You cannot argue it is not an ABI, just because
> there is no framework. Userspace will be assuming it exists at the
> specified location. So we cannot remove it, for existing uses of the
> driver.
Am Ok as long as someone is happy to maintain it.

--srini
> However, for new uses of this driver, it is O.K. to only have the
> NVMEM file.
>
>        Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/