On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 04:25:36PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Chris Wright wrote:
> > * Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks, will add it. Any objections for this to go through my
> >> driver-core tree to Linus for 2.6.31?
> >>
> >
> > None from me.
> >
>
> Fine by
Chris Wright wrote:
> * Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
>
>> Thanks, will add it. Any objections for this to go through my
>> driver-core tree to Linus for 2.6.31?
>>
>
> None from me.
>
Fine by me.
Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
J
___
* Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 03:35:35PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > * Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@suse.de) wrote:
> > > In the near future, the driver core is going to not allow direct access
> > > to the driver_data pointer in struct device. Instead, the functions
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 03:35:35PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@suse.de) wrote:
> > In the near future, the driver core is going to not allow direct access
> > to the driver_data pointer in struct device. Instead, the functions
> > dev_get_drvdata() and dev_set_drvdata
* Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@suse.de) wrote:
> In the near future, the driver core is going to not allow direct access
> to the driver_data pointer in struct device. Instead, the functions
> dev_get_drvdata() and dev_set_drvdata() should be used. These functions
> have been around since the begin
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
In the near future, the driver core is going to not allow direct access
to the driver_data pointer in struct device. Instead, the functions
dev_get_drvdata() and dev_set_drvdata() should be used. These functions
have been around since the beginning, so are backwards com
