On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:34:21PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
>
> > The ones I've been cc:ed on, with the exception of the hostap patch, I
> > will be glad to take though my trees now, unless you want to take them
> > yourself?
>
> If Al is happy with it, he might want to take
Greg KH wrote:
> The ones I've been cc:ed on, with the exception of the hostap patch, I
> will be glad to take though my trees now, unless you want to take them
> yourself?
If Al is happy with it, he might want to take it through his tree since it's
sat on top of his experimental branch - especi
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:27:40PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
>
> Here is a series of patches to eliminate create_proc_read_entry(), replacing
> it
> with proc_create() and proc_create_data() and the use of seq_file facilities.
>
> This requires file_operations structs and open methods to be pr
On Thursday 11 April 2013, David Howells wrote:
>
> Here is a series of patches to eliminate create_proc_read_entry(), replacing
> it
> with proc_create() and proc_create_data() and the use of seq_file facilities.
> These patches can be seen here also:
>
>
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/lin
Here is a series of patches to eliminate create_proc_read_entry(), replacing it
with proc_create() and proc_create_data() and the use of seq_file facilities.
This requires file_operations structs and open methods to be provided in most
cases, though single_open() and single_open_size() suffice fo
5 matches
Mail list logo