[linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/2] iio: Set correct iio name

[Yong Li]

Hi Bruce,

The Upstream-Status:Submitted[http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-iio/msg24331.html]
for more information, please visit
https://github.com/ostroproject/meta-ostro-bsp/pull/34

without this patch, the device I2C name is mismatch with the IIO name:

root at intel-corei7-64:/sys/bus/i2c/devices/1-0040# cat name

tmp006

root at intel-corei7-64:/sys/bus/i2c/devices/1-0040# cat iio\:device0/name

1-0040

Sensor framework(Soletta) will use this name, the name "tmp006" is
much better than the  "X-0040"


Thanks,
Yong

2016-05-31 2:22 GMT+08:00 Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>:
> On 2016-05-28 09:50 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2016-05-28 at 12:34 +0800, Yong Li wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Bruce Saul,
>>>
>>> I had submitted the patches into Kernel mail list, the concern is the
>>> legacy application compatibility:
>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-iio/index.html#24331
>>>
>>> For the Ostro OS, Using Soletta framrwork, we have tested/verified
>>> more more than 30 different I2C
>>> devices(https://ostroproject.org/documentation/hardware/sensors.html)
>>> .
>>> But only the two devices have incorrect device names(the IIO name
>>> does
>>> not match the I2C device name). QA team think it is a bug
>>>
>> So is it possible to fix the test in this case to correctly handle the
>> legacy naming rather than make it fail?  I guess the concern here is if
>> we "fix" the name, we will really break the legacy applications.  It's
>> possible for those application to run in Ostro also and since Ostro is
>> newer, it would break those rather than the other way around.
>
>
> Any update on this ? I can merge the change to standard/intel, but
> if we do that, I'd like to update the commit logs to show the upstream
> submission, and explain that why this use case prefers to make the
> names match (versus the upstream compatibility argument).
>
> That way, we'll know to carry the patch and not try to re-submit it
> upstream later.
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>> Sau!
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yong
>>>
>>> 2016-05-27 23:51 GMT+08:00 Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2016-05-27 at 10:24 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2016-05-27 12:58 AM, Yong Li wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Maintainers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch fixes the “incorrect IIO device name” issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please merge it into standard/base branch for linux-yocto-4.4
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> this looks okay.
>>>>>
>>>>> The change looks technically correct, just a question about if
>>>>> these
>>>>> are also going upstream to the mainline kernel.
>>>>>
>>>> Bruce,
>>>>
>>>> These are possibly candidates for the standard/intel branch,
>>>> they where proposed upstream and deemed correct, but not merge-able
>>>> due
>>>> to creating incompatible names.
>>>>
>>>> Yong Li,
>>>> What is requiring the name change in Ostro, why can't Ostro
>>>> use the existing incorrect, but compatible name?
>>>>
>>>> Sau!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bruce
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Yong Li
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yong Li (2):
>>>>>>     iio: tmp006: Set correct iio name
>>>>>>     iio: si7020: Set correct iio name
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    drivers/iio/humidity/si7020.c    | 2 +-
>>>>>>    drivers/iio/temperature/tmp006.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>    2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>