[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: x86, microcode: Conversion from sysdev class caused regression
+ Dave.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 07:06:21PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > The reason for the error is that subsys_interface_register() doesn't
> > handle the return value of sif->add_dev (and there's also no unwinding
> > of the interface registration). Instead subsys_interface_register
> > always returns 0.
> Which is the intended behaviour of 'subsystem interfaces' from the
> driver-core perspective. It should not matter if one of a bunch of
> devices do not 'like' this 'interface'. It is the same model as a
> 'driver', we do not cancel the link-in of a driver if one device does
> not like the driver.

But you're not looking at the return value of sif->add_dev which looks
strange to me. Let me put it this way: why do you have return values to
->add_dev's interface then if you're not going to look at them?

A warning that one of the dev_add's failed could probably make sense


> I think a quick return in the microcode driver, for a device which has
> no active interface state is the best solution here.

Actually, it is even easier: the code clumsily does:

if (err)

so we go and create sysfs group, THEN check whether this CPU is
supported and if not, remove the group again which is a bunch of crap if
you ask me. The right way to go should be:

if (err)

and then there's no need to do all that sysfs group dancing. Andreas,
let me know if you wanna do it, or I should take care of it.



Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-11 22:07    [W:0.128 / U:2.832 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site