From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262951AbUEQWTU (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 18:19:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262954AbUEQWTU (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 18:19:20 -0400 Received: from stat1.steeleye.com ([65.114.3.130]:47069 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262951AbUEQWS3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 18:18:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] init. mca_bus_type even if !MCA_bus From: James Bottomley To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Randy.Dunlap" , Linux Kernel In-Reply-To: <20040517151412.1f7fb7d4.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20040517144603.1c63895f.rddunlap@osdl.org> <20040517151412.1f7fb7d4.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-9) Date: 17 May 2004 17:18:23 -0500 Message-Id: <1084832306.2092.67.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 17:14, Andrew Morton wrote: > Why is it appropriate to register the MCA bus type when there is no > MCA bus present? The legacy bus functions all have a bus_for_each_dev in them. This can't execute correctly unless the bus is registered. So either a check for MCA_bus has to be added to each of them, or we register the bus but attach no devices, so the loop exits without doing anything. James