On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 20:10 -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 12/12/2011 08:04 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 14:19 -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> This was doing something evil building a dt tree so we broke the device.
> >
> >> @@ -711,8 +711,12 @@ VIOsPAPRBus *spapr_vio_bus_init(void)
> >> spapr_rtas_register("ibm,set-tce-bypass", rtas_set_tce_bypass);
> >> spapr_rtas_register("quiesce", rtas_quiesce);
> >>
> >> +#if 0
> >> + /* Evil and broken */
> >
> > By which you mean: works fine, broken by your patch?
>
> These patches were never supposed to go out. Ignore this series entirely.
But I just read all 197 of them ! ;)
> >> for (qinfo = device_info_list; qinfo; qinfo = qinfo->next) {
> >> VIOsPAPRDeviceInfo *info = (VIOsPAPRDeviceInfo *)qinfo;
> >> + VIOsPAPRDeviceClass *pc = VIO_SPAPR_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(dev);
> >>
> >> if (qinfo->bus_info !=&spapr_vio_bus_info) {
> >> continue;
> >> @@ -722,6 +726,7 @@ VIOsPAPRBus *spapr_vio_bus_init(void)
> >> info->hcalls(bus);
> >> }
> >> }
> >> +#endif
> >
> > It's registering hcalls for each class of device we find on the spapr
> > vio bus. I don't understand why that is evil, but what do you suggest we
> > do instead?
>
> I talked to David about this, the hcalls can just be registered as part the
> device_init entry points.
OK I'll talk to him about it. I don't think device_init() works, because
we only want to register the hcalls if an instance of the device is
instantiated. But I guess we'll come up with something.
cheers
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
