On 19:54 Sun 03 May , Magnus Lilja wrote:
> Hi Jean-Christophe,
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c
> > index 061da64..2b6b137 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c
> > @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ int ubi_create_volume(struct ubi_device *ubi, struct
> > ubi_mkvol_req *req)
> > vol->dev.class = ubi_class;
> >
> > sprintf(&vol->dev.bus_id[0], "%s_%d", ubi->ubi_name, vol->vol_id);
> > - err = device_register(&vol->dev);
> > + err = console_register(&vol->dev);
> > if (err) {
> > ubi_err("cannot register device");
> > goto out_gluebi;
> > @@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ int ubi_add_volume(struct ubi_device *ubi, struct
> > ubi_volume *vol)
> > vol->dev.devt = dev;
> > vol->dev.class = ubi_class;
> > sprintf(&vol->dev.bus_id[0], "%s_%d", ubi->ubi_name, vol->vol_id);
> > - err = device_register(&vol->dev);
> > + err = console_register(&vol->dev);
>
> Again a bit surprised to find anything about consoles in the UBI code.
> In contrast to my earlier comment, this code seems to be compiled
> (i.e. it's not within #ifdef UBI_LINUX).
> I'm guessing you did a global search/replace for
> device_register=>console_register?
yes
I've use script to generate the patch for the RFC
For ubi the device_register is replace via macro by 0
this will not been touch by the final patch
and fully check before
btw this is one of the confusing point of the current implementation
Best Regards,
J.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
