Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588 driver to 2.6.35
in [Kernel]
|
From: Felipe Balbi on 11 Aug 2010 01:50 On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 04:14:51AM +0200, ext Masayuki Ohtake wrote: >> > > +#define TRUE 1 >> > > +#define FALSE 0 >> > >> > These lines should not be needed at all. >> OKI-san, please remove them, Those definition is useless. > >Is the above definition is necessary? >I can't find appropriate header file defines 'TRUE' and 'FALSE'. it's true and false. Lowercase. UNUSED is __unused. -- balbi DefectiveByDesign.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Greg KH on 11 Aug 2010 11:20 On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 04:29:25PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > Hi Greg, > > > Do they all have to be ioctls? What exactly are they doing? > I think using ioctl is common for this patch. "Common" is not ok, right? > Do you think that using ioctl is NOT appropriate for this patch? Yes. > Let me know your intension in more detail. Please express yours. Why do you feel you need these to be ioctls? What exactly are they doing? Where is the documentation for them all? > > And are they 32/64bit safe? > Only 32bit support. That's an obvious problem that needs to be resolved, right? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Wang, Qi on 11 Aug 2010 21:20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh(a)suse.de] > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:15 PM > To: Masayuki Ohtake > Cc: meego-dev(a)meego.com; LKML; Wang, Qi; Wang, Yong Y; Khor, Andrew > Chih Howe; arjan(a)linux.intel.com > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588 driver to > 2.6.35 > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 04:29:25PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > > Do they all have to be ioctls? What exactly are they doing? > > I think using ioctl is common for this patch. > > "Common" is not ok, right? > > > Do you think that using ioctl is NOT appropriate for this patch? > > Yes. > > > Let me know your intension in more detail. > > Please express yours. Why do you feel you need these to be ioctls? > What exactly are they doing? Where is the documentation for them all? > > > > And are they 32/64bit safe? > > Only 32bit support. > > That's an obvious problem that needs to be resolved, right? The Tunnelcreak processor (A kind of Atom-based processor) only supports 32b, so PCH drivers only support 32b. They can make it 32/64 compatible, but it's difficult to test them, because there're no 64b Atom-based platform have those PCH devices. Best Regards, QI. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
From: Greg KH on 11 Aug 2010 22:10 On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 09:13:24AM +0800, Wang, Qi wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh(a)suse.de] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:15 PM > > To: Masayuki Ohtake > > Cc: meego-dev(a)meego.com; LKML; Wang, Qi; Wang, Yong Y; Khor, Andrew > > Chih Howe; arjan(a)linux.intel.com > > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588 driver to > > 2.6.35 > > > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 04:29:25PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > Do they all have to be ioctls? What exactly are they doing? > > > I think using ioctl is common for this patch. > > > > "Common" is not ok, right? > > > > > Do you think that using ioctl is NOT appropriate for this patch? > > > > Yes. > > > > > Let me know your intension in more detail. > > > > Please express yours. Why do you feel you need these to be ioctls? > > What exactly are they doing? Where is the documentation for them all? You forgot to answer this. > > > > And are they 32/64bit safe? > > > Only 32bit support. > > > > That's an obvious problem that needs to be resolved, right? > The Tunnelcreak processor (A kind of Atom-based processor) only > supports 32b, so PCH drivers only support 32b. > They can make it 32/64 compatible, but it's difficult to test them, > because there're no 64b Atom-based platform have those PCH devices. But that does not mean you should not be using the proper types and other things necessary for proper ioctl usage. As you failed to describe what any of these ioctls do, I can't recommend that you have any of them in the driver. sorry, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Wang, Qi on 11 Aug 2010 22:20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh(a)suse.de] > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 10:00 AM > To: Wang, Qi > Cc: Masayuki Ohtake; meego-dev(a)meego.com; LKML; Wang, Yong Y; Khor, > Andrew Chih Howe; arjan(a)linux.intel.com > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588 driver to > 2.6.35 > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 09:13:24AM +0800, Wang, Qi wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh(a)suse.de] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:15 PM > > > To: Masayuki Ohtake > > > Cc: meego-dev(a)meego.com; LKML; Wang, Qi; Wang, Yong Y; Khor, Andrew > > > Chih Howe; arjan(a)linux.intel.com > > > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588 driver to > > > 2.6.35 > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 04:29:25PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > Do they all have to be ioctls? What exactly are they doing? > > > > I think using ioctl is common for this patch. > > > > > > "Common" is not ok, right? > > > > > > > Do you think that using ioctl is NOT appropriate for this patch? > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > Let me know your intension in more detail. > > > > > > Please express yours. Why do you feel you need these to be ioctls? > > > What exactly are they doing? Where is the documentation for them all? > > You forgot to answer this. Ohtake-san, Please answer this question asap. > > > > > > And are they 32/64bit safe? > > > > Only 32bit support. > > > > > > That's an obvious problem that needs to be resolved, right? > > The Tunnelcreak processor (A kind of Atom-based processor) only > > supports 32b, so PCH drivers only support 32b. > > They can make it 32/64 compatible, but it's difficult to test them, > > because there're no 64b Atom-based platform have those PCH devices. > > But that does not mean you should not be using the proper types and > other things necessary for proper ioctl usage. > > As you failed to describe what any of these ioctls do, I can't recommend > that you have any of them in the driver. Ohtake-san, Please solve 32b/64b safe issue asap. > > sorry, > > greg k-h
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Topcliff: Update PCH_GPIO driver to 2.6.35 Next: Topcliff: Update PCH_SPI driver to 2.6.35 |