On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 18:27:47 +0200 Robert Schwebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 01:52:02PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > > index 9f3a4cd..12453e2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > > @@ -220,7 +220,17 @@ config I2C_PIIX4 > > > > config I2C_IBM_IIC > > tristate "IBM PPC 4xx on-chip I2C interface" > > - depends on IBM_OCP > > + depends on !PPC_MERGE > > + help > > + Say Y here if you want to use IIC peripheral found on > > + embedded IBM PPC 4xx based systems. > > Can we agree on one nomenclature - either i2c or iic? > > > + This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module > > + will be called i2c-ibm_iic. > > Are these drivers the same functionality (host i2c driver for 4xx)? If > yes, shouldn't all in-tree users be migrated over and the old style > driver be removed (with deprecation period)? They are the same functionality, but for two different versions of the arch. The old one is arch/ppc, the new one is arch/powerpc. 4xx is being migrated to arch/powerpc so eventually what you say will happen. The arch/ppc tree is scheduled for removal in June of 2008. For now, we need both drivers since not everything in 4xx has moved yet. josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
