On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 15:03 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> 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.
Just a question: Why do you want to have the nvram low level code as a
module ? It's sort-of an intergral part of the arch code ...
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |