[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE07AB7.2070901@austin.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:31:03 -0500
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...tin.ibm.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5 v4] Export memory_sysdev_class
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 09:44 -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
>> Export the memory_sysdev_class structure. This is needed so we can create
>> a 'release' file in sysfs in addition to the existing 'probe' file in
>> order to support DLPAR removal of memory on the powerpc/pseries platform.
>> The new 'release' file will be powerpc/pseries only.
>
> Please do it in generic code. You may only need it on ppc today, but
> somebody else is going to want the same thing tomorrow on another arch.
I thought about this but wasn't sure if having the probe/release sysfs files
for memory and cpu be in generic code would be accepted.
Would it be acceptable to put the new release file for memory under the
ARCH_MEMORY_PROBE config option? This would reduce the number of arch'es
that would require stubs as it appears only powerpc and x86 define this.
I could do the same thing for the cpu probe/release files and a new
ARCH_CPU_PROBE config option which would eliminate the required stubs
in arch'es other than powerpc right now.
-Nathan Fontenot
>
> It's also nice to keep all of the stuff doing the actual sysfs munging
> in one place. I know it'll cost a few stubs for calling in and out of
> arch code, but it should save some work down the road for somebody else.
>
> -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists