From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jack Steiner Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:48:00 +0000 Subject: Re: calling oem sal functions Message-Id: <20040819184800.GB6710@sgi.com> List-Id: References: <4124E222.2080105@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4124E222.2080105@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 06:29:04PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 05:23:46PM +0000, Tony Luck wrote: > > Dean, > > > > I've been thinking about this, and it does seem unresonable that there > > is no way for an OEM written module to make a call to an OEM SAL function. > > > > Would something like the (compiles, but untested) attached patch work > > for you? The return value of 0/-1 just indicates whether the SAL call > > was attempted. Callers should look at the status field of the isrvp > > structure to determine the actual success of the call. > > > > Would you also need "_nolock" and "_reentrant" versions? > > Please make the exports _GPL so we have the callers under rcontrol. SGI uses OEM_SAL calls in some of it's online diagnostics. These diagnostics are run on production systems, both in the factory and at customer sites. If the SAL call interface is marked _GPL, then these diagnostics cant be run on standard kernels. Since the OEM_SAL call interface restricts SAL calls to the OEM range of function codes, I dont understand why these calls should be GPL'ed. -- Thanks Jack Steiner (steiner@sgi.com) 651-683-5302 Principal Engineer SGI - Silicon Graphics, Inc.