Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Feb 2015 10:11:59 +0100 | Subject | Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> |
| |
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> wrote: >> > On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: >> > > Removes some functions that are not used anywhere: >> > > mac_pram_write() mac_pram_read() >> > >> > ... I'd rather not remove all of this code. Better to finish the >> > implementation. >> >> Indeed. >> >> > Would it be acceptable to utilize drivers/char/generic_nvram.c and >> > CONFIG_GENERIC_NVRAM? This is the PowerMac PRAM driver but looks >> > generic enough that it may not need any modification for 68k Macs. >> >> Yes, that would be great. >> > > Unfortunately, it seems to be unworkable.
An alternative could be to just provide an nvram attribute file in sysfs, like many RTC drivers do.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |