From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B4FA2C030A for ; Tue, 28 May 2013 08:59:55 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1369691284.3557.34.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: kirkwood: proper retain MAC address workaround on DT ethernet From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: David Miller Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 07:48:04 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1369647565.3557.28.camel@pasglop> <51A33447.80305@gmail.com> <1369655404.3557.33.camel@pasglop> <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: andrew@lunn.ch, jason@lakedaemon.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, buytenh@wantstofly.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 13:18 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt > Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 21:50:04 +1000 > > > It would be handy to be able to just do something like > > > > of_set_property(node, name, ptr, len); > > > > However, that wouldn't help much with the allocation/leak problem, > > though at least it would be easier to use. It could also *try* to re-use > > the current allocation if the new content is of smaller or equal size. > > And this is so much better of an interface because it allows the > OF implementation to decide how to deal with memory allocation > and freeing. Absolutely, I'm not arguing that point. Cheers, Ben. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: benh@kernel.crashing.org (Benjamin Herrenschmidt) Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 07:48:04 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: kirkwood: proper retain MAC address workaround on DT ethernet In-Reply-To: <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1369647565.3557.28.camel@pasglop> <51A33447.80305@gmail.com> <1369655404.3557.33.camel@pasglop> <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> Message-ID: <1369691284.3557.34.camel@pasglop> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 13:18 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt > Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 21:50:04 +1000 > > > It would be handy to be able to just do something like > > > > of_set_property(node, name, ptr, len); > > > > However, that wouldn't help much with the allocation/leak problem, > > though at least it would be easier to use. It could also *try* to re-use > > the current allocation if the new content is of smaller or equal size. > > And this is so much better of an interface because it allows the > OF implementation to decide how to deal with memory allocation > and freeing. Absolutely, I'm not arguing that point. Cheers, Ben. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757748Ab3E0WLG (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2013 18:11:06 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:36018 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757107Ab3E0WLE (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2013 18:11:04 -0400 Message-ID: <1369691284.3557.34.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: kirkwood: proper retain MAC address workaround on DT ethernet From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: David Miller Cc: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com, buytenh@wantstofly.org, jason@lakedaemon.net, andrew@lunn.ch, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@linaro.org Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 07:48:04 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1369647565.3557.28.camel@pasglop> <51A33447.80305@gmail.com> <1369655404.3557.33.camel@pasglop> <20130527.131857.945196320286011406.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 13:18 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt > Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 21:50:04 +1000 > > > It would be handy to be able to just do something like > > > > of_set_property(node, name, ptr, len); > > > > However, that wouldn't help much with the allocation/leak problem, > > though at least it would be easier to use. It could also *try* to re-use > > the current allocation if the new content is of smaller or equal size. > > And this is so much better of an interface because it allows the > OF implementation to decide how to deal with memory allocation > and freeing. Absolutely, I'm not arguing that point. Cheers, Ben.