From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nommos.sslcatacombnetworking.com (nommos.sslcatacombnetworking.com [67.18.224.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9227CDE013 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:14:12 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20070411.212548.95037188.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20070403230505.f96ea210.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20070403232406.ab9a3c86.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20070412141905.6f30efd3.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20070411.212548.95037188.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <3F3BE390-906F-4B14-92DB-BA6BB191D022@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] Split out common parts of prom.h Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:13:47 -0500 To: David Miller Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Apr 11, 2007, at 11:25 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Stephen Rothwell > Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:19:05 +1000 > >> This applies on top of all the previous patches I sent (including >> a merge >> of the sparc64 and powerpc for-2.6.22 trees). So if people can't >> get it >> to apply, at least I would like some comments on the direction. (I >> told >> Rusty about the circular inclusion below and he didn't throw up, so I >> figure it isn't too bad as a temporary measure.) >> >> I have built allmodconfig (modified slightly) for Powerpc, Sparc64 >> and >> Sparc. (All of which fail during the module post processing but for >> reasons not related to these patches as far as I can see.) > > This is one approach, and I'm not against it. > > Another way is to create a linux/openfw.h that does nothing > but include asm/prom.h as step 1. Step 2 is to convert all > the include sites, and step 3 is to move the relevant > prom.h bits into openfw.h > > To be honest, since you're the one doing all of the hard work I think > you should be allowed to make the choice on how to go about this :-) Should we drop prom.h all together. I haven't looked but I would think OLPC would need (or use) some of this as well since its using OF. - k