From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org (hellhawk.shadowen.org [80.68.90.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE09DDE3D for ; Fri, 11 May 2007 20:40:47 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <46444820.2020506@shadowen.org> Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:40:32 +0100 From: Andy Whitcroft MIME-Version: 1.0 To: michael@ellerman.id.au Subject: Re: [PATCH] update sysfs kset initialisation in PPC64 DLPAR IO driver References: <464322F3.3010808@shadowen.org> <2c705c055fcd12202673ee8a3056153b@pinky> <20070510141221.GA26709@suse.de> <46434041.7020903@shadowen.org> <20070511071606.GB1211@suse.de> <1178870289.3923.6.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1178870289.3923.6.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Andrew Morton , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org, Linus Torvalds List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 00:16 -0700, Greg KH wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:54:41PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >>> Greg KH wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 03:00:50PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >>>>> Move the rpadlpar device from "struct subsystem" to "struct kset" >>>>> following the changes in sysfs. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Whitcroft >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> Ok, this patch seems to sort out the compile problem >>>>> here and indeed boots and runs kernbench. Perhaps >>>>> you could confirm this is sufficient. >>>> As per the discussion on the pci hotplug list, no, this doesn't seem to >>>> fix the problem. The developers there are looking into it. If you can >>>> test out patches for this, I'm sure the people there would appreciate >>>> the help. >>> Sure anything they have for testing, send them to me ... >> They have the same patch that you made (I made it), yet they reported >> that it didn't work properly for them. >> >> Can you test your patch out on "real" hardware? > > I tested it on real hardware, but it can't hurt for Andy to try it too I > guess. To be fair I am not sure I have a clue how to test it. Got a recipe? My patch was based on how other drivers seemed to be converted which is a concern for those drivers. What sort of failure do you see? -apw