From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (asus_atk0110) Don't load if ACPI resources aren't enforced Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:10:49 +0100 Message-ID: <20100330211049.GA1524@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20100309135636.373a40a9@hyperion.delvare> <20100330120319.627e8f9a@hyperion.delvare> <20100330132132.GA16657@srcf.ucam.org> <20100330214732.42f488ba@hyperion.delvare> <20100330194835.GA32322@srcf.ucam.org> <20100330223251.76c6b000@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:38888 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754668Ab0C3VKx (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:10:53 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100330223251.76c6b000@hyperion.delvare> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, LM Sensors , Len Brown On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:32:51PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Sure, but why do you insist on having the user configure this manually > when we can automate this at the kernel level? When > acpi_enforce_resouce=yes, the kernel doesn't let non-ACPI driver be > loaded, so I fail to see why we let ACPI drivers (for which we also > have native drivers) load when acpi_enforce_resouce=no. Because the situation with the asus driver loaded isn't obviously any worse than not having it loaded. The user is telling us that they're happy with racy access to their hwmon hardware. Automatically blocking the loading of the ACPI driver does nothing other than imply to the user that things are safe, when in reality they're anything but. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org