On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Brian Norris <computersforpe...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 08:47:46AM +0100, Frans Klaver wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Brian Norris >> <computersforpe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 10:39:45PM +0100, Frans Klaver wrote: >> >> add_mtd_device() has a comment suggesting that the caller should have >> >> set dev.parent. This is required to have the device show up in sysfs, >> > >> > What do you mean "have the device show up in sysfs"? AFAICT, this only >> > has bearing on whether the *parent* device shows up as a sysfs symlink >> > within the MTD device directory. i.e.: >> > >> > /sys/class/mtd/mtd*/device >> > >> > For instance, this sort of symlink: >> > >> > /sys/class/mtd/mtd0/device -> ../../../f03e2800.nand >> > >> > It might be good to clarify this in the commit message, since you make >> > the problem sound worse than (I think) it is. >> >> I do? That was definitely not my intention. I'll look into it. > > Maybe it's just my bias when reading, since some people have complained > loudly about this, seemingly without understanding that the problem > really isn't that significant. > > So my question was really just to confirm my own understanding, that > this only affects the 'device' symlink.
Ah right. I'll double check and reword where necessary. I already had the feeling that this wasn't very significant, as there weren't any real issues related to this using these drivers. > BTW, it'd be nice if you don't respam with another 60 patches, if you're > only changing a few of them. I can probably take most of them as-is, > after you confirm there are no more compile failures. Sure thing, I thought as much. Thanks, Frans -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/