On 08/11/2012 01:42 AM, Saul St. John wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 06:55:22AM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> > 2012/8/10 Saul St. John <saul.stjohn@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> > > Adds a driver for BCMA ChipCommon cores, registers the struct device >>> > > bcma_bus.drv_cc->core->dev with device_register(), and exposes the SPROM >>> > > in rev 31+ cc cores as a R/W sysfs attribute. >> > >> > Well, that's a little messy. You change a few not strictly related >> > things in a one patch, please provide patch-per-change. That changes >> > are quite sensitive so we really need it. > Ok, v2 will be split over a couple of patches. > >> > I also wish to see some explanation on that changes. Why do you need >> > CC to be registered as a bus core device? Why anyone may need >> > overwriting SPROM? Did it work for you? Have you tested >> > suspend&resume? Hi Saul, I am really not in favor for adding write support. As Rafał noted there is no need for linux end-users to be modifying SPROM content. It is called Serial Programmable *Read-Only* Memory for a reason. The only parties that need write access are the chip manufacturer and OEM/ODM. Most information is rather device specific and sensitive to change. Also changing information like country code (as you indicated you did) can cause violations in the regulatory area. Without a clear need of this functionality for the linux users I tend to discard this change, but I am not the bcma maintainer. Could you elaborate what your higher-level use is? If the reasons for having this patch accepted are clear and valid I would suggest to make it depend on CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS Kconfig option. Gr. AvS -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
