Messages in this thread | | | From | Mike Frysinger <> | Date | Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:50:36 -0400 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCHv3 1/4] drivers/otp: add initial support for OTP memory |
| |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 18:47, Jamie Iles wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 05:58:05PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 13:14, Jamie Iles wrote: >> > +/* We'll allow OTP devices to be named otpa-otpz. */ >> > +#define MAX_OTP_DEVICES 26 >> >> mmm is that still true ? > > I think so - the actual devices should be otpa-otpz, but when you > register regions they could be otpa1, otpa2, otpb1, otpb2 etc. > >> >> > +static unsigned long registered_otp_map[BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_OTP_DEVICES)]; >> > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(otp_register_mutex); >> >> do we really need this ? if we let the minor number dictate >> availability, then we can increment until that errors/wraps, and we >> dont need to do any tracking ... > > OK, so it would be nice to get rid of this but afaict we still need to > do some accounting of available minor numbers in the range that we've > allocated. We could do a simple increment % 255 for the minor number > but if OTP devices are removed at runtime then that may get fragmented > and we would need to do retries of device_register() which feels a bit > too easy to mess up. > > Certainly allocating one major number for OTP devices then allocating > the minors one by one would be much better than what I have now. > > We probably also want it so that if you remove the OTP device that has > had regions called otpaN then reinsert it they doesn't suddenly become > otpbN.
yeah that's true. guess i'll leave it be then ;).
whatever naming is picked in /dev/ should match the stuff in /sys/ btw ... -mike -- 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/
| |