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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50884B5D.9030009@freescale.com> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:11:09 -0500 From: Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com> To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com> CC: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Wei Yang <Wei.Yang@...driver.com>, Manoil Claudiu-B08782 <B08782@...escale.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] gianfar_ptp: use iomem, not ioports resource tree in probe Richard Cochran wrote: >> > Oh, I agree with that. I was just wondering why an OF-enabled driver >> > would not use OF calls. I've never seen that before. My instinct is that >> > the original developer had no idea what he was doing, but perhaps there is >> > a very good reason for the way the driver is written. > Instead of using your instinct, try using your brain instead. Well, as you are obviously so much smarter than I am, how about enlightening me? I do not see any explanations in the original commit, and I do not know why someone would use non-OF calls to get data from the device tree. I didn't even know that you could use platform_get_irq() to get the virtual IRQ from a device tree. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists