From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:49:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arch/mips/txx9/generic: init dynamic bin_attribute Message-Id: <20100315174905.GC20055@linux-mips.org> List-Id: References: <1268377431-11671-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <1268377431-11671-2-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <20100312183450.GC8736@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 03:28:55AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > Regarding all 3 - it looks like these dynamically alocated attributes > > could be converted to statically allocated ones. I'd recommend doing > > that instead (in fact, I posted patch for the firmware_class couple days > > ago). > > I agree for the firmware-patch. Regarding the MIPS one, 'size' might differ and > 'private' will differ per instance. Regarding the RTC driver, 'size' might also > differ. I don't know if somebody really wants two RTCs or the SRAM for MIPS can > be instantiated more than once. Unless somebody with actual hardware jumps in, > I'd say better safe than sorry. On the txx9 platform you've posted the patch for additional RTCs or SRAMs would not normally be expected. On other platforms such as IP27 there would be one per node that is potencially very many. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:49:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:33382 "EHLO h5.dl5rb.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S1492375Ab0CORtJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:49:09 +0100 Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by h5.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2FHn6HA021200; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:49:07 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by h5.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o2FHn5Xu021198; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:49:05 +0100 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:49:05 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arch/mips/txx9/generic: init dynamic bin_attribute structures Message-ID: <20100315174905.GC20055@linux-mips.org> References: <1268377431-11671-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <1268377431-11671-2-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <20100312183450.GC8736@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 26235 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 03:28:55AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > Regarding all 3 - it looks like these dynamically alocated attributes > > could be converted to statically allocated ones. I'd recommend doing > > that instead (in fact, I posted patch for the firmware_class couple days > > ago). > > I agree for the firmware-patch. Regarding the MIPS one, 'size' might differ and > 'private' will differ per instance. Regarding the RTC driver, 'size' might also > differ. I don't know if somebody really wants two RTCs or the SRAM for MIPS can > be instantiated more than once. Unless somebody with actual hardware jumps in, > I'd say better safe than sorry. On the txx9 platform you've posted the patch for additional RTCs or SRAMs would not normally be expected. On other platforms such as IP27 there would be one per node that is potencially very many. Ralf