On 09-07-08 23:36, Russ Anderson wrote:

quoted text
>> ... and wouldn't uv_bios_strerror/uv_bios_freq_base be better names?
> 
> The plan is for both x86 and ia64 versions of uv, with this being
> the x86 version.  The ia64 version has ia64_sal_strerror()
> and ia64_sal_freq_base().  Hence the x86_bios_* naming convention.
> I'm not strongly tied to that convention, it just seemed logical.

Ah, I see. Not much of an opinion then. x86_bios sounds a bit generic, 
but whatever...

quoted text
> Here is the updated patch.

[ ... ]

quoted text
> +enum {
> +	BIOS_STATUS_SUCCESS		=  0,
> +	BIOS_STATUS_UNIMPLEMENTED	= -1,
> +	BIOS_STATUS_EINVAL		= -2,
> +	BIOS_STATUS_ERROR		= -3
> +};

[ .. ]

quoted text
> +extern long
> +x86_bios_freq_base(unsigned long which, unsigned long *ticks_per_second,
> +		   unsigned long *drift_info);

quoted text
> +static __init void uv_rtc_init(void)
> +{
> +	unsigned long status, ticks_per_sec, drift;

*status* should remain a long :-)

Rene.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/