From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com [208.72.237.25]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AB3DE269 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 05:55:07 +1100 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:54:51 -0500 From: Nathan Lynch To: Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH] RTAS - adapt procfs interface Message-ID: <20080402185451.GT7137@localdomain> References: <200804011512.20834.jens@de.ibm.com> <20080401163504.GP7137@localdomain> <20080401200404.GS7137@localdomain> <18419.29333.344126.231799@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <18419.29333.344126.231799@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Cc: maxim@de.ibm.com, cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Paul Mackerras wrote: > Nathan Lynch writes: > > > I think this is better... the way these files are used is lame, but > > this should preserve the existing behavior. I haven't yet tested > > this, can you? > > Looks OK -- can I have a proper patch description and a signed-off-by > line for this please? Actually, my patch has the potentially undesirable consequence of allowing only one of the three flash-related proc files to be open at any time, whereas the previous behavior enforced exclusive open on a per-file basis. If you want something for 2.6.25, I think the patch Jens posted is of lower risk.