Re: [PATCH v8 13/25] m68k: Dispatch nvram_ops calls to Atari or Mac functions

2018-12-30 Thread LEROY Christophe
Finn Thain a écrit : On Sat, 29 Dec 2018, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 1:43 AM Finn Thain wrote: > + > +static ssize_t m68k_nvram_get_size(void) > +{ > + if (MACH_IS_ATARI) > + return atari_nvram_get_size(); > + else if (MACH_IS_MAC) > +

Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG_NVRAM

2018-12-30 Thread LEROY Christophe
Arnd Bergmann a écrit : On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 3:51 AM Michael Schmitz wrote: Hi Finn, Am 29.12.2018 um 15:34 schrieb Finn Thain: > On Sat, 29 Dec 2018, Michael Schmitz wrote: > >> >> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_NVRAM) is probably what Christophe really meant to suggest. >> >> Or (really going

Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG_NVRAM

2018-12-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Sun, 2018-12-30 at 18:50 +0100, LEROY Christophe wrote: > Arnd Bergmann a écrit : > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 3:51 AM Michael Schmitz > > wrote: [...] > > > (On second thought - I don't want to speculate whether there's > > > weird compiler options that could result in the > > >

Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG_NVRAM

2018-12-30 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, James Bottomley wrote: > > That said, as has been pointed out, the current #ifdef has a failing > corner case when both are modular (because the code should then be > included). The runtime macro that correctly expresses this is > IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_NVRAM). > No, in

[PATCH] block/amiflop: Don't log error message on invalid ioctl

2018-12-30 Thread Finn Thain
Cc: linux-m...@lists.linux-m68k.org Signed-off-by: Finn Thain --- drivers/block/amiflop.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/block/amiflop.c b/drivers/block/amiflop.c index bf996bd44cfc..0903e0803ec8 100644 --- a/drivers/block/amiflop.c +++ b/drivers/block/amiflop.c @@

Re: [PATCH v8 13/25] m68k: Dispatch nvram_ops calls to Atari or Mac functions

2018-12-30 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, LEROY Christophe wrote: > > > > > > Since the operations are almost entirely distinct, why not have two > > > separate 'nvram_ops' instances here that each refer to just the set > > > they actually need? > > > > > > > The reason for that is that I am alergic to code

Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG_NVRAM

2018-12-30 Thread Finn Thain
On Mon, 31 Dec 2018, Finn Thain wrote: > On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > That said, as has been pointed out, the current #ifdef has a failing > > corner case when both are modular (because the code should then be > > included). The runtime macro that correctly expresses

Re: [PATCH v8 18/25] powerpc: Implement nvram sync ioctl

2018-12-30 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, Finn Thain wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/nvram.h b/include/linux/nvram.h > > > index b7bfaec60a43..24a57675dba1 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/nvram.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/nvram.h > > > @@ -18,8 +18,12 @@ struct nvram_ops { > > > unsigned char