Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves
From: Guenter Roeck <hidden>
Date: 2015-08-25 15:18:30
Also in:
alsa-devel, linux-acpi
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2015-10-12 · Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves · Jarkko Nikula <hidden>
- 2015-10-09 · Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves · Wolfram Sang <hidden>
- 2015-10-02 · Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves · Jarkko Nikula <hidden>
- 2015-10-01 · Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves · Wolfram Sang <hidden>
- 2015-08-25 · Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves · Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
On 08/25/2015 07:57 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 06:25:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:quoted
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 01:52:02PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:quoted
Commit 70762abb9f89 ("i2c: Use stable dev_name for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves") broke the lm-sensors which relies on I2C hwmon slave devices under /sys/bus/i2c/devices/ to be named as "x-00yz". However if those hwmon devices are ACPI 5 enumerated their name became "i2c-INTABCD:ij" and sysfs code in lm-sensors does not find them anymore:Acked-by: Mark Brown <redacted>Don't you think there will be regressions given that the new naming scheme was around for 18 months?
acpi is pretty long term. New bindings don't show up quickly. So I am not surprised that this only shows up now. Will there be regressions ? Who knows. What we do know is that there are regressions today due to the original change. Guenter