From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com (e33.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e33.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59D3FB7D45 for ; Sat, 29 May 2010 23:41:51 +1000 (EST) Received: from d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.228]) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o4TDbZTc032309 for ; Sat, 29 May 2010 07:37:35 -0600 Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (d03av05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.85]) by d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o4TDfjgk128364 for ; Sat, 29 May 2010 07:41:45 -0600 Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o4TDfjkh006576 for ; Sat, 29 May 2010 07:41:45 -0600 Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 09:41:43 -0400 From: Josh Boyer To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: mmio_nvram.c users ? Message-ID: <20100529134143.GL24511@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <1274773439.1931.238.camel@pasglop> <20100525110050.GH24511@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <1275104704.1931.528.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1275104704.1931.528.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev , Arnd Bergmann List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 01:45:04PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 07:00 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 05:43:59PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >Hi folks ! >> > >> >Anybody aware of anything other than Cell using that driver ? >> > >> >I'd like to make it a platform driver instead of having something that >> >pokes at anything that has a "device_type" set to "nvram" (which is >> >gross and bogus). But I need to know what platforms to fixup... >> >> Why bother? You could just use either drivers/mtd/devices/{phram.c or slram.c} >> and get the same functionality at that point, couldn't you? > >Won't that break existing userspace ? Probably. Maybe we shouldn't have duplicated a driver in our platform code to begin with. josh