Re: Remove ocp-proc.c

3 messages, 3 authors, 2002-10-04 · open the first message on its own page

Re: Remove ocp-proc.c

From: Matt Porter <hidden>
Date: 2002-10-03 14:57:53

On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 04:21:59PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
This patch completely removes drivers/ocp/ocp-proc.c from 2.5, along
with all references to it - it's been terminally broken for some time
now.  Shall I commit this to linuxppc-2.5?
I think so.  In a previous thread you brought this up and I think
moving some of the provided infos into driverfs at a later point is
the goal, correct?  At any rate, it's the Right Thing To Do(tm).

Regards,
--
Matt Porter
porter@cox.net
This is Linux Country. On a quiet night, you can hear Windows reboot.

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Remove ocp-proc.c

From: Todd Poynor <hidden>
Date: 2002-10-03 17:11:02

quoted
This patch completely removes drivers/ocp/ocp-proc.c from 2.5, along
with all references to it - it's been terminally broken for some time
now.  Shall I commit this to linuxppc-2.5?
Using driverfs instead sounds fine to me.  It's definitely the way to go
if all the other /proc/bus/ denizens are moving to driverfs in the near
future, anyhow.  Even if not, and /proc/bus/ lives on for certain
busses, "ocp" is something of an artificial bus anyhow, and using a
driverfs interface with a structure more closely approximating the real
bus structure of the platform should be a good thing.


--
Todd


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Remove ocp-proc.c

From: David Gibson <hidden>
Date: 2002-10-04 01:55:51

On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 07:57:53AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 04:21:59PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
quoted
This patch completely removes drivers/ocp/ocp-proc.c from 2.5, along
with all references to it - it's been terminally broken for some time
now.  Shall I commit this to linuxppc-2.5?
I think so.  In a previous thread you brought this up and I think
moving some of the provided infos into driverfs at a later point is
the goal, correct?  At any rate, it's the Right Thing To Do(tm).
Done.

Some of the info - the actual list of devices/drivers - is already in
driverfs, simply by virtue of the fact that we call device_register()
and friends.

--
David Gibson			| For every complex problem there is a
david@gibson.dropbear.id.au	| solution which is simple, neat and
				| wrong.
http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help