Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions

2015-02-02 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Finn Thain wrote: On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Finn Thain wrote: On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: Removes some functions that are not used

Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions

2015-02-02 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: On Sun, Feb 01, 2015 at 02:39:42PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: I find the ARM support in drivers/char/nvram to be surprising, not to say questionable. The /proc/driver/nvram implementation, given defined(__arm__), decodes the NVRAM

Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions

2015-02-01 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Finn Thain fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote: On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Finn Thain fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote: On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: Removes some functions that are not used

Re: nvram and generic_nvram modules are problematic, was Re: [PATCH] arch: m68k: mac: misc.c: Remove some unused functions

2015-02-01 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Sun, Feb 01, 2015 at 02:39:42PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: I find the ARM support in drivers/char/nvram to be surprising, not to say questionable. The /proc/driver/nvram implementation, given defined(__arm__), decodes the NVRAM contents in exactly the same format as when defined(__i386__)