Re: removal of EXPORT_SYMBOL(insert_resource)?

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:31:08PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> I have a situation that I believe warrants leaving insert_resource as an 
> exported API.
> 
> I've got a bus implementation that it done as a module.  While I'm more 
> than happy to provide this bus implementation to be included in the 
> mainline, I dont think it makes much sense to do so.  The code is only 
> useful to an extremely small handful of people.  If we want to clutter the 
> kernel with it I'm happy to provide a patch for it.

Please do, keeping code outside the kernel makes it _very_ hard on you.
It makes it easier if everything is in-the-tree, as you know.

Hell, we have two whole x86 subarchs with only 4 machines each in
existance, a simple bus is nothing :)

> The situation I have is a FPGA connect over PCI.  The FPGA implements a 
> number of different "functions" but uses PCI more like an SoC bus than a 
> true PCI device.  Anyways, in some discussions with gregkh, it was 
> suggested the best thing was to create a new bus type that the "fpga" 
> drivers would bind to.
> 
> I use insert_resource to handle registering the MMIO regions for each 
> device (similar to how platform devices are registered).

All the better reason to get it into the tree...

thanks,

greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/