lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions
From
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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-02-01 10:21    [W:2.139 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site