lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sparc: stop exporting openprom.h header
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 02:51:43 -0600
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 02:34:50PM -0700, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 13:00:25 -0600
> > Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:52 PM, David Miller
> > > <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> > > > From: Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>
> > > > Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:34:24 -0700
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> It's unknown why openprom.h was being exported; there doesn't
> > > >> seem to be any reason for it currently, and it creates
> > > >> headaches with userspace being able to potentially use the
> > > >> structures in there. So, don't export it anymore.
> > > >>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > >
> > > I suppose it makes sense for me to pick this one up into my tree
> > > so it is grouped with the rest of the pdt patches. I'll pick it
> > > up once Andres reposts the series.
> > >
> > > g.
> >
> > Ok, I sent a new version of the phandle stuff (which was easier than
> > expected, and doesn't affect any other patches).
> >
> > So to summarize, what's pending is:
> >
> > 1- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/242041/ (sparc: stop exporting
> > openprom.h header)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 2- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/242601/ ([v3] sparc: convert
> > various prom_* functions to use phandle)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 3- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141011/ (sparc: break out some
> > PROM device-tree building code out into drivers/of)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 4- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141021/ (sparc: make
> > drivers/of/pdt.c no longer sparc-only)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 5- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141031/ (of: no longer call
> > prom_ functions directly; use an ops structure)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 6- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141041/ (of: add
> > of_pdt namespace to pdt code)
> > Acked by Dave
> >
> > 7- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141051/ (of: add
> > package-to-path support to pdt)
>
> I've picked up 1-7 and am build testing now.
>
> > 8- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/141071/ (x86: OLPC: add OLPC
> > device-tree support)
>
> I'm not happy about the /proc/devicetree stuff in this patch. I would
> rather see the proc_device_tree_init() call moved to initcall time
> so that the need for an of_pdt_init_devicetree() hook goes away, but
> there are a number of gotchas for dynamic tree users that I need to
> investigate. Anyway, I'll get 1-7 tested and into linux-next while I
> think about patch 8.
>

I'm failing to see why it's a problem to have the hook (which could
just as easily be a generic proc_root_init_prepare hook called from
proc_root_init(), allowing usage by various other subsystems), but
okay.

I'm not that familiar w/ the dynamic tree stuff; do you imagine this
being an invasive change, or will it be as simple as just deferring the
init call?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-09 22:49    [W:0.218 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site