linux-kernel - Re: [patch/rfc 2.6.29 2/2] MTD: support driver model updates

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200903312257.37434.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date:	Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:57:37 -0700
From:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To:	dedekind@...radead.org
Cc:	Linux MTD <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc 2.6.29 2/2] MTD: support driver model updates

On Tuesday 31 March 2009, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> > @@ -866,6 +866,7 @@ static int __init mxcnd_probe(struct pla
> >       mtd = &host->mtd;
> >       mtd->priv = this;
> >       mtd->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > +     mtd->dev.parent = &pdev->dev;
> 
> Could this be done for all NANDs in nand_base.c instead?

By adding the device as a parameter to nand_scan(),
and presumably nand_scan_ident() ... which is a more
invasive API change, and would require a "flag day"
to convert all drivers.

My default assumption for API changes is to avoid
flag days.  They can be done, yes, but I don't see
a compelling reason to choose one here.

- Dave


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/