On Thu, 24 Nov 2011, Alan Cox wrote:
Given the change should work for all hardware do we really need the
ifdefs. Far better I would have thought to just change it so we don't
have to maintain what is effectively two versions of the code between
now and 2038.
I agree.
So no ack from me yet - I'd like to understand the ifdef decision first.
Removing ifdefs makes the changes more invasive and the suspend/resume
code then has to be addressed, which I've avoided.
The suspend/resume code path can't be tested on m68k macs and the common
code paths I can't easily test on a powermac.
This patch should not be needed because the chip reset shouldn't leave the
tx and rx interrupts enabled. Those interrupts are explicitly enabled only
after request_irq(), so patching the master interrupt enable behaviour
should be redundant. But that's not the case in practice.
The chip reset code is already messy. I was inclined towards ifdefs and
reluctant to share more code after practical experience suggested possible
differences in the SCC/ESCC devices.
I guess I was hoping that the powermac maintainers might prefer ifdefs to
increased risk of destabilising the driver on powermacs...
But a more invasive patch would make for better code. I will see if I can
borrow a suitable PCI PowerMac.
Finn
Otherwise it looks sensible.
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Video for Linux]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Video Projectors]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]
