From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 23:44:02 +0000
Subject: Re: phandle patch review?
Message-Id: <20101007164402.02a7a068@debxo>
List-Id: <sparclinux.vger.kernel.org>
References: <AANLkTikaAkPqgKu-+JTbPOjiqKZdOcz+czEGUvvbc00y@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikaAkPqgKu-+JTbPOjiqKZdOcz+czEGUvvbc00y@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 17:01:28 -0600
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:59:53 -0700
> > Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 05:39:59 +0900
> >> Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Andres Salomon
> >> > <dilinger@queued.net> wrote:
> >> > > Hi Grant,
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm assuming the sparc patches can go through your tree as
> >> > > well. Please let me know if anything else needs to happen, now
> >> > > that we have an ACK from davem.
> >> >
> >> > Did the phandle -> types.h issues get sorted out? =C2=A0I can't
> >> > remember.
> >>
> >> The relevant thread was here:
> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/140991/
> >>
> >> I found Sam's initial comment unclear, so I asked for clarification
> >> (specifying that we didn't need phandle to be exported to
> >> userspace); his response was:
> >>
> >> "So the above looks good considerign that userspace
> >> so far does not require ihanlde/phandle."
> >>
> >> I left it open-ended regarding whether or not userspace might want
> >> phandle/ihandle to be exported (that's more a question for you
> >> flat devicetree folks :) , but for my purposes not having it
> >> exposed to userspace is just fine.
> >
> >
> >
> > So yeah, please let me know if there's anything outstanding that I
> > missed that would keep the patches from getting merged.
>=20
> Okay, I'm confused.  As you say, asm/openprom.h is exported.  None of
> openprom.h is protect with __KERNEL__, so all of it gets exposed to
> userspace.  You're patch adds phandle to the __KERNEL__ protected
> section of types.h, which means that it is unavailable to userspace.
> In which case anything from userspace including asm/openprom.h will
> fail to compile, or am I missing something?
>=20

Ah, you're right, so phandle will need to be exported to userspace as
well.  I will send an updated patch.