Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Nov 2006 14:48:46 +0900 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add dev_sysdata and use it for ACPI |
| |
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 09:35:37AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 17:04 +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 11:45:21 +1100, > > Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > - Add a dev_sysdata structure to struct device whose content is arch > > > specific. It will allow architectures like powerpc, arm, i386, ... who > > > need different types of DMA ops for busses and other kind of auxilliary > > > data for devices in general (numa node id, firmware data, etc...) to put > > > them in there, without bloating all architectures. The patch adds an > > > empty definition for the structure to all architectures. > > > > I like this. If we could move the dma stuff in there, we could get rid > > of it on s390 where it is just bloat we drag around... > > > > (Maybe dev_archdata would be a better name, since the definition is > > architecture specific?) > > Hrm... I wonder why I posted from my IBM address :-) I have no firm > preference on the name of the structure. So far, I had no feedback on > that patch at all appart from yours though. > > Andrew, Greg ? Is that something you would take for 2.6.20 ? I need to > know wether I should rework my patches to use that or stick to my hacks > involving hijacking firmware_data.
Sorry, I'm in Japan this week, and access to email is limited.
I like this change, but I like the dev_archdata name better. It lets people know who owns the pointer much better.
Care to respin these patches with this change?
And yes, I don't see a problem with such a change like this for 2.6.20, it's pretty simple.
thanks,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |