On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 10:28:45AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> [100907 17:17]: > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:26:47PM -0700, David Cross wrote: > > > This patch exports some of the gpmc driver functions in OMAP3. The purpose behind this patch > > > is to allow device drivers compiled as loadable modules to be interfaced to the GPMC. I am > > > hoping that Tony is the correct maintainer and willing to ACK this change. Please let me know > > > if there are any issues or concerns with this patch. > > > Thanks, > > > David > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Cross <david.cross@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > diff -uprN -X linux-next-vanilla/Documentation/dontdiff linux-next-vanilla/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c linux-next-incl-sdk/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c > > > --- linux-next-vanilla/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c 2010-08-31 19:32:51.000000000 -0700 > > > +++ linux-next-incl-sdk/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c 2010-09-01 16:10:21.000000000 -0700 > > > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ void gpmc_cs_write_reg(int cs, int idx, > > > reg_addr = gpmc_base + GPMC_CS0_OFFSET + (cs * GPMC_CS_SIZE) + idx; > > > __raw_writel(val, reg_addr); > > > } > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(gpmc_cs_write_reg); > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() perhaps? > > > > What about platforms that don't have this symbol, how will the driver > > build properly then? Shouldn't something like this be in a arch-neutral > > place in the kernel tree? > > I don't think exporting these functions is a good idea, so NAK from > me for that. > > All the drivers should be generic, and whatever needs to be done > that's omap specific should be done in the platform init code. Ah, that makes more sense. David, care to make those changes? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
