Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:17:02 +0200 From: Nicolas Souchu <nsouch@fr.alcove.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org, roger@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bktr and smbus Message-ID: <20010719151701.M32191@ontario.alcove-fr> In-Reply-To: <20010717195452.A9080@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>; from brooks@one-eyed-alien.net on Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 07:54:52PM -0700 References: <20010717195452.A9080@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 07:54:52PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > I'm working on reducing the number of devices with count entries in > sys/conf/files*. (i.e. devices that you configure with entries like > "device XXX 2" instead of "device XXX".) While looking for low hanging > fruit, I noticed the only consumer of NSMBUS in the tree is the bktr > driver and that the only significan code in the bktr driver the uses > NBKTR is the smbus code in bktr_i2c.c. After spending some time trying to > remove NSMBUS and NBKTR, I'm wondering why the smbus code exists as all. > Are there any advantages to running with this? There certaintly aren't At the opposite, FreeBSD has an smbus framework, why don't use it and duplicate the I2C logic everywhere? There's no reason not using FreeBSD smbus. > any code savings (the support functions are larger then the builtin > i2c code) and the easiest way to remove NSMBUS and NBKTR would be to > remove the smbus code followed by a four line patch define NBKTR to 1 > in one place. The solution is rather at http://people.freebsd.org/~nsouch/iicbus.html I've uploaded a patch for -current. I'd be very happy to get feedback about it. Nicolas -- Alcôve Technical Manager - Nicolas.Souchu@fr.alcove.com - http://www.alcove.com Open Source Software Developer - nsouch@freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-multimedia" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010719151701.M32191>