From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1F2C2BB55 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:44:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 155A720786 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:44:39 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 155A720786 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=buserror.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4938nJ5LpSzDsMN for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 05:44:36 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=buserror.net (client-ip=165.227.176.147; helo=baldur.buserror.net; envelope-from=oss@buserror.net; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=buserror.net Received: from baldur.buserror.net (baldur.buserror.net [165.227.176.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4938l62Q9kzDqF1 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 05:42:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from [2601:449:8480:af0:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0] by baldur.buserror.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jPANA-00078g-07; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:40:28 -0500 Message-ID: <54b97ce51fa3686d17a4b124c4deccb9939725b9.camel@buserror.net> From: Scott Wood To: Greg KH Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:40:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20200416063002.GA299193@kroah.com> References: <20200415124929.GA3265842@kroah.com> <20200415152442.122873-1-wenhu.wang@vivo.com> <20200415152442.122873-6-wenhu.wang@vivo.com> <20200416063002.GA299193@kroah.com> Organization: Red Hat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2601:449:8480:af0:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, wenhu.wang@vivo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, christophe.leroy@c-s.fr, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kernel@vivo.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: oss@buserror.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v2,5/5] drivers: uio: new driver for fsl_85xx_cache_sram X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 02 Aug 2016 21:08:31 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on baldur.buserror.net) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@vivo.com, Wang Wenhu , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 08:30 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 02:26:55PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > Instead, have module parameters that take the sizes and alignments you'd > > like > > to allocate and expose to userspace. Better still would be some sort of > > dynamic allocation (e.g. open a fd, ioctl to set the requested > > size/alignment, > > if it succeeds you can mmap it, and when the fd is closed the region is > > freed). > > No module parameters please, this is not the 1990's. > > Use device tree, that is what it is there for. Since when is the device tree for indicating desired allocations? This is not hardware description. If module parameters are unacceptable, then I'd suggest dynamic allocation as described above. -Scott