From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758591AbWLIV67 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Dec 2006 16:58:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758303AbWLIV66 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Dec 2006 16:58:58 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.25]:53408 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758591AbWLIV65 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Dec 2006 16:58:57 -0500 Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 13:58:29 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Olivier Galibert Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Jean Delvare , Paul Mackerras , Linux Kernel list Subject: Re: sysfs file creation result nightmare (WAS radeonfb: Fix sysfs_create_bin_file warnings) Message-Id: <20061209135829.86038f32.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20061209214453.GA69320@dspnet.fr.eu.org> References: <20061209165606.2f026a6c.khali@linux-fr.org> <1165694351.1103.133.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061209123817.f0117ad6.akpm@osdl.org> <20061209214453.GA69320@dspnet.fr.eu.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 22:44:53 +0100 Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 12:38:17PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 06:59:10 +1100 > > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > Why would I prevent the framebuffer from initializing (and thus a > > > console to be displayed at all on many machines) just because for some > > > reason, I couldn't create a pair of EDID files in sysfs that are not > > > even very useful anymore ? > > > > Because there's a bug in your kernel. We don't hide and work around bugs. > > Hmmm, I don't understand. Which is the bug, having a sysfs file > creation fail or going on if it happens? Probably the former, probably the latter. There may be situations in which we want do to "create this sysfs file if it doesn't already exist", but I'm not aware of any such. Generally speaking, if sysfs file creation went wrong, it's due to a bug. The result is that the driver isn't working as intended: tunables or instrumentation which it is designed to make available are not present. We want to know about that bug asap so we can get it fixed.