Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Finn Thain <fthain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Finn Thain <fthain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Video for Linux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux S/390]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux