Re: Industrial device driver uio/uio_*

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 05:12:47PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:32:25PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:59:54 +0100
> > > > I would just NAK it but want to be sure the guys saw the list of
> > > > problems
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > cc's added.
> > > 
> > > Thomas has been a bit tied up with timers and interrupts of late.
> > 
> > Yup. fork(tglx) still returns -ETOOMANYINSTANCES.
> > 
> > I have no objections, if you pull it from -mm for now. The list of flaws
> > is accepted and we'll work on this in foreseeable time, _IF_ there is
> > some basic consensus about the idea itself not being fundamentaly wrong.
> > 
> I've got a few cycles I can throw at this, it's a problem space we
> (Renesas) are interested in too..
> 
> Alan, is your Sept. 11 list the extent of your issues with the current
> code, or was there more that you sent off-list?
> 
> I'll toss up a quick git tree for this so we don't lose anything, and
> the fixes can trickle in to -mm that way, or it can just be pulled and
> added back later.

Please just send me patches and I'll update the main version that I
have, which will get pulled into -mm.

And yes, I need to look at this some more too.  I was considering just
stripping it down to the bare essencials right now, the interrupt
handling stuff, and then slowly adding pieces back when people asked for
them.

Unless people need all of the different options right now?

thanks,


greg k-h