From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758933Ab0CMIeJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:34:09 -0500 Received: from mail-yw0-f198.google.com ([209.85.211.198]:60229 "EHLO mail-yw0-f198.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758910Ab0CMIeG (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:34:06 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=B8eGl0B/reUWxzOdxwT2w5uTFpEQqz/uL7jYw7CUAp8+WVvkOmnQmLdNUzx91+RI/g TeVvFxWnYckVqJtCKyD1qwMRy73OeA6O/XNrznlopZrtnxilb2f3Qxsdw0MypB/3dVws 4hS0n1aMh1+Jdr54jZe4F4wgEMv9KdZLz4NZ4= Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 00:33:59 -0800 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Wolfram Sang Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arch/mips/txx9/generic: init dynamic bin_attribute structures Message-ID: <20100313083359.GB22494@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1268377431-11671-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <1268377431-11671-2-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <20100312183450.GC8736@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100313022855.GD4034@pengutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 03:28:55AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:34:51AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:03:49AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Commit 6992f5334995af474c2b58d010d08bc597f0f2fe introduced this requirement. > > > Found with coccinelle, but fixed manually. Compile tested on X86 where > > > possible. > > > > > > > Regarding all 3 - it looks like these dynamically alocated attributes > > could be converted to statically allocated ones. I'd recommend doing > > that instead (in fact, I posted patch for the firmware_class couple days > > ago). > > I agree for the firmware-patch. Regarding the MIPS one, 'size' might differ and > 'private' will differ per instance. Regarding the RTC driver, 'size' might also > differ. I don't know if somebody really wants two RTCs or the SRAM for MIPS can > be instantiated more than once. Unless somebody with actual hardware jumps in, > I'd say better safe than sorry. > Ah, right, size... I forgot about it. You are right, making the other 2 static is not an option. -- Dmitry