Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:09:49 +0200 | From | Cornelia Huck <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.21-rc4-mm1 |
| |
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:06:18 -0800, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Would I be right in guessing that this was all triggered by > uevent-improve-error-checking-and-handling.patch?
Looks like it, since it passed the uevent failures to the upper layer.
> If so, do you think I should labour on with > uevent-improve-error-checking-and-handling.patch plus your fix, or should I > drop the lot? (I'm inclined toward the latter, but I'm still not > sure which patch(es) need to be dropped).
This depends on what semantics uevent returning an error code should have. The firmware code was using it to suppress uevents, but uevent_suppress is a better idea now. So if we want uevent returning != 0 to imply "something really bad happened", all uevent functions have to be audited and those that work like firmware_uevent have to be converted to uevent_suppress. This would be cleaner, but I'm not sure it's worth the work. - 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/
| |