On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 16:29 +1100, Andrew Donnellan wrote: > On 08/02/16 22:31, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Pulling the memcons out of the bin_attr here is not all that nice. This > > routine > > should really stand on its own without reference to the bin_attr. In theory > > I > > might want to disable building sysfs but still have this routine available. > > Yeah it's a bit ugly, though does disabling sysfs actually break it?
Probably not, it looks like bin_attribute is still defined even when sysfs is disabled. And the build would break in other places too. > I can separate it out anyway - there's no reason for the memcons to be > tied to the sysfs entry. Yeah that was more my point. > > It's also a bit fishy if it's called before the bin_attr is initialised or > > when > > the memcons initialisation fails. In both cases it should be OK, because the > > structs in question are static and so the private pointer will be NULL, but > > that's a bit fragile. > > > > I think the solution is simply to create a: > > > > static struct memcons *opal_memcons; > > > > And use that in opal_msglog_copy() and so on. > > Will respin. Thanks. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
