From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: greg@kroah.com (Greg KH) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 17:54:22 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: allow, but warn, when issuing ioremap() on RAM In-Reply-To: <20101009002546.GB14675@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1286444662-16843-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20101007192245.GC26435@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20101008175308.GA10975@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20101008230451.GB10975@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20101008232539.GA28697@kroah.com> <20101008234448.GD10975@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20101009000046.GA30616@kroah.com> <20101009002546.GB14675@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20101009005422.GA21180@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 01:25:47AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 05:00:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > But you can't expect that you make this change, and not fix up the > > drivers, and people would be happy, right? The rule for API changes > > like this, or anything, is that the person making the change fixes the > > other drivers, and that seems to be the issue here. > > Let's entirely revert the change and wait for people's data to be > corrupted then. I don't have the time nor the motivation to work > through crap driver code to fix up these unreliable games which are > already illegal on platforms such as x86. > > If people want their system to be unpredictable, then let's carry on > giving them the rope to hang themselves in that manner. > > > Any pointers to patches where people have fixed up the drivers? > > Despite the discussion, I'm unaware of anyone really taking the issue > seriously and producing any patches during the last six months. > > So, I say sod it, let's revert the change. Well, how about throw a big WARN() to let people know that their driver needs to be fixed? That will give them the chance, right? thanks, greg k-h