Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752853Ab0HWMa6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:30:58 -0400 Received: from sm-d311v.smileserver.ne.jp ([203.211.202.206]:29796 "EHLO sm-d311v.smileserver.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752752Ab0HWMa4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:30:56 -0400 Message-ID: <000401cb42bf$07e201f0$66f8800a@maildom.okisemi.com> From: "Masayuki Ohtake" To: "Greg KH" Cc: "Morinaga" , , , , , , , "LKML" , References: <4C6BA385.80409@dsn.okisemi.com> <20100818131401.GA5861@suse.de> <000601cb3f99$8f5a0a20$66f8800a@maildom.okisemi.com> <20100819152214.GD2562@suse.de> Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_PHUB driver to 2.6.35 Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 21:30:51 +0900 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1983 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1983 X-Hosting-Pf: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2800 Lines: 67 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg KH" To: "Masayuki Ohtake" Cc: ; "LKML" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "Morinaga" Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 12:22 AM Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_PHUB driver to 2.6.35 > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 09:25:03PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > > Please find > > If someone takes the time to review your code and ask questions, it is > considered common courtesy to at least answer them all and not ignore > some of them. Please do so. > > > > > drivers/misc/Kconfig | 9 + > > > > drivers/misc/Makefile | 1 + > > > > drivers/misc/pch_phub.c | 722 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 3 files changed, 732 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > create mode 100755 drivers/misc/pch_phub.c > > > > > > You forgot to add documentation for your sysfs files in > > > Documentation/ABI/ which is a requiremend when you add new ones. > > > > > > Which folder should we put stable/ or testing/ ? > > Which do you feel it should be in? I think 'testing' is appropriate. > > > > > +}; > > > > + > > > > +/* SROM SPEC for MAC address assignment offset */ > > > > +static const int pch_phub_mac_offset[ETH_ALEN] = {0x3, 0x2, 0x1, 0x0, 0xb, 0xa}; > > > > + > > > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(pch_phub_mutex); > > > > +static struct pch_phub_reg pch_phub_reg; > > > > > > So you can only have one of these devices in a system at the same time? > > > What happens when a machine ships with two of them? > > > > > > I can't understand the above questioin meaning. > > Give me more information, please. > > What's does the above "these devices" mean? > > The device the driver is controlling. What happens when this driver > runs on a system that has 2 of these devices? You need to be able to > handle multiple devices, and that doesn't happen with a single variable, > right? Please dynamically allocate it and make the lock associated to > the actual device, not the whole driver, if possible. I can understand your saying. But our driver for Topcliff doesn't support multiple device but single device only. >From LSI structure point of view, I think, it is impossible that topcliff is used as multiple devices. None the less, should our driver support multiple device ? Thanks, Ohtake(OKISEMI) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/