On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 15:00 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > There used to be cases where we used the nvram stuff before kmalloc() > was available. I'll check if this is still the case. Ah, ok. Makes sense. In that case I suppose it must be #ifdef'ed for the module case. > Well... the driver doesn't expect you to boot a different OS while > suspended to disk :) Yeah :) It'd be nice though since except for that I haven't found any other adverse effects. > Regarding caching the data in memory, this is done becaues nvram is > actually a flash on recent machines, and you really want to limit the > number of write cycles to it. Ok, makes sense. When I get some time I'll look into converting and implementing reloading for that case, but now that I compile as a module and unload it, it hardly is a priority. Thanks for your answers, johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: pmac_nvram problems
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: pmac_nvram problems
- References:
- pmac_nvram problems
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: pmac_nvram problems
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- pmac_nvram problems
- Prev by Date: RE: The Linux FAT issue on SD Cards.. maintainer support please
- Next by Date: RE: The Linux FAT issue on SD Cards.. maintainer support please
- Previous by thread: Re: pmac_nvram problems
- Next by thread: Re: pmac_nvram problems
- Index(es):
