[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type of callback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait()
    On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
    <> wrote:
    > I basically tried a few different approaches, including deferred probe(),
    > as you suggested, and request_firmware_async(), as Kay suggested.

    Stop this crazy. FIX UDEV ALREADY, DAMMIT.

    Who maintains udev these days? Is it Lennart/Kai, as part of systemd?

    Lennart/Kai, fix the udev regression already. Lennart was the one who
    brought up kernel ABI regressions at some conference, and if you now
    you have the *gall* to break udev in an incompatible manner that
    requires basically impossible kernel changes for the kernel to "fix"
    the udev interface, I don't know what to say.

    "Two-faced lying weasel" would be the most polite thing I could say.
    But it almost certainly will involve a lot of cursing.

    > However, for 3.7 or 3.8, I think that the better is to revert changeset 177bc7dade38b5
    > and to stop with udev's insanity of requiring asynchronous firmware load during
    > device driver initialization. If udev's developers are not willing to do that,
    > we'll likely need to add something at the drivers core to trick udev for it to
    > think that the modules got probed before the probe actually happens.

    The fact is, udev made new - and insane - rules that are simply
    *invalid*. Modern udev is broken, and needs to be fixed.

    I don't know where the problem started in udev, but the report I saw
    was that udev175 was fine, and udev182 was broken, and would deadlock
    if module_init() did a request_firmware(). That kind of nested
    behavior is absolutely *required* to work, in order to not cause
    idiotic problems for the kernel for no good reason.

    What kind of insane udev maintainership do we have? And can we fix it?

    Greg, I think you need to step up here too. You were the one who let
    udev go. If the new maintainers are causing problems, they need to be
    fixed some way.


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-10-02 19:01    [W:3.883 / U:0.024 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site