Paul Mackerras wrote: > Nathan Lynch writes: > > > I think this is better... the way these files are used is lame, but > > this should preserve the existing behavior. I haven't yet tested > > this, can you? > > Looks OK -- can I have a proper patch description and a signed-off-by > line for this please?
Actually, my patch has the potentially undesirable consequence of allowing only one of the three flash-related proc files to be open at any time, whereas the previous behavior enforced exclusive open on a per-file basis. If you want something for 2.6.25, I think the patch Jens posted is of lower risk. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
