EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs
Val Henson
val at nmt.edu
Tue Mar 26 09:05:40 EST 2002
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 11:44:10AM +1100, Murray Jensen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:09:30 -0700, Val Henson <val at nmt.edu> writes:
> >How about one BI_IGNORE type, and driver writers and firmware authors
> >can put whatever they feel like inside that bi_rec?
>
> The kernel should simply ignore any bi_rec it doesn't know about. You don't
> need a special record tag for this. Any bi_recs within bi_recs are all ignored
> in one fell swoop, since the outer record tag is unknown.
I know most of you understand this, but I just wanted to make it
clear:
The kernel should simply ignore any bi_rec it doesn't know about - and
does. The question is, how can we guarantee that the kernel doesn't
know about that bi_rec? The answer is that we need to reserve at
least one (or several, under Ben's plan) bi_rec types that are
guaranteed not to be used by the kernel. That's all I was trying to
say.
-VAL
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list