On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 02:51:54PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi Greg,
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Greg KH wrote:[color=green]
> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 03:04:48PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:[color=darkred]
> > >
> > > But wait ... isn't that a statically-allocated kobject, which were
> > > supposed to be "naughty" in the first place?[/color]
> > Yes it is, if you want to dynamically create it, please do.[/color]
> Sorry for being late to reply, but do you still want such a patch (i.e.
> convert static to dynamic allocation)?[/color]
Yes, I'll gladly take such patches.
> I read elsewhere on this thread that you'd merge Kamalesh's patch and
> fix it up to also use kobject_name() yourself. But it's a small/trivial
> driver, so I think just converting it to dynamic allocation right now
> itself (when we've noticed it already) is probably better (?)[/color]
Sure that would be great to have.
> [ BTW I don't see the fix in your git trees or quilt queue. So I'll
> make a patch on top of 2.6.23-rc6-mm1 itself. ][/color]
I'm behind in updating my patch queue, sorry, other things came up :(
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email]email@example.com[/email]
More majordomo info at [url]http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html[/url]
Please read the FAQ at [url]http://www.tux.org/lkml/[/url]