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:0.024 / U:30.364 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site