From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from de01egw01.freescale.net (de01egw01.freescale.net [192.88.165.102]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BF067A70 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 04:34:20 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20050316221152.GZ8345@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20050316221152.GZ8345@smtp.west.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:34:14 -0600 To: "Tom Rini" Cc: linuxppc-dev list Subject: Re: building ppc_htab? List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mar 16, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:57:24AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > Is there any reason not to make the following change so we build > > ppc_htab only on PPC STD MMU?=A0 This would also require fixing up > > fs/proc/proc_misc.c. > > I could have sworn, but maybe my memory sucks, that we no longer = messed > w/ fs/proc/proc_misc.c for any of the PPC-specific things (since in = 2.6 > you can do all of that proc magic in your 'driver').=A0 So this patch > would make a great deal of sense to do, and if it lacks what I'm=20 > talking > about, we should do that part as well :) I'm not exactly clear on what you are talking about. There is this=20 snippet in fs/proc/proc_misc.c: #ifdef CONFIG_PPC32 { extern struct file_operations ppc_htab_operations; entry =3D create_proc_entry("ppc_htab", = S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR,=20 NULL); if (entry) entry->proc_fops =3D &ppc_htab_operations; } #endif Are you suggesting this should live elsewhere? I'm not that familiar=20 with proc code. - kumar