Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:30:36 +0300
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Michael Gmelin <grembo@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: SM bus ioctls incorrect in FreeBSD 11
Message-ID:  <cd749499-10ff-e843-bce9-3ef72124eb14@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161014171126.74e6e2fc@bsd64.grem.de>
References:  <06929AC5-D350-4236-A813-56C862B58174@perftech.com> <fe780e23-f014-1c84-b702-12727cd68ef0@FreeBSD.org> <20161014171126.74e6e2fc@bsd64.grem.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14/10/2016 18:11, Michael Gmelin wrote:
> For some history on these changes, please see also [1] and [2] (there
> were a few discussions and the revision was bumped, I also tried to
> get some attention, but not enough it seems).
> 
> Given your recent changes to iicbus in HEAD, I think it would be best to
> MFC those and go with Option 4 or, if that's to drastic, go with
> Option 1.

I am leaning towards this approach as well.

> Thanks for cleaning after me.

You asked for a discussion and reviews.
I can not recall what I was doing at that time, but I completely ignored the
development and for that I can only blame myself.

> [1]https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2015-March/016972.html
> [2]https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2015-May/017157.html

I also agree that having a thin library on top of the ioctl would be a convenience.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cd749499-10ff-e843-bce9-3ef72124eb14>