[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701041242080.3073@hadrien>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:43:32 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, andrew@...n.ch,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com,
Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>,
sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: armada38x: add __ro_after_init to
armada38x_rtc_ops
> The question was whether the point to the rtc_class_ops could be made
> __ro_after_init. And Russell is right, it is pointed to by the ops
> pointer in a struct rtc_device and that struct is dynamically allocated
> in rtc_device_register().
OK, I think it's a terminology issue. You mean the structure that
contains the pointer, and not the pointer itself, which is already const.
thanks,
julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists