From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Driver core: add new device to bus's list before probing
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:05:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090731160544.GA3430@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac3eb2510907301357j43189388lae6ec5d4e6ad365e@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 04:57:06PM -0400, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 15:27, Alan Stern<stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > This patch (as1271) affects when new devices get linked into their
> > bus's list of devices. Currently this happens after probing, and it
> > doesn't happen at all if probing fails. Clearly this is wrong,
> > because at that point quite a few symbolic links have already been
> > created in sysfs. We are committed to adding the device, so it should
> > be linked into the bus's list regardless.
> >
> > In addition, this needs to happen before the uevent announcing the new
> > device gets issued. Otherwise user programs might try to access the
> > device before it has been added to the bus.
> >
> > To fix both these problems, the patch moves the call to
> > klist_add_tail() forward from bus_attach_device() to bus_add_device().
> > Since bus_attach_device() now does nothing but probe for drivers, it
> > has been renamed to bus_probe_device(). And lastly, the kerneldoc is
> > updated.
>
> Thanks for doing this that quickly. You are doing a really great job.
>
> > Kay, do you want this merged into 2.6.31 or are you okay with waiting
> > for 2.6.32-rc1? It changes a major core routine. On the other hand,
> > the problem it fixes does affect real users.
>
> I think it should go into -next and we wait a few days. It seems like
> the proper fix, but we should make sure, we didn't miss something.
>
> After that, it would be nice if we can get that into 2.6.31, as we
> have several problems already, which are likely solved by this.
But as this isn't a regression (it's how things always have worked,
right?), I'm a bit leary of pushing it to .31 right now, so late in the
release cycle. How about it goes to Linus for .32, and we backport it
to -stable if it looks ok?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-31 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-30 19:27 [PATCH] Driver core: add new device to bus's list before probing Alan Stern
2009-07-30 20:57 ` Kay Sievers
2009-07-31 16:05 ` Greg KH [this message]
2009-07-31 16:30 ` Kay Sievers
2009-07-31 16:41 ` Greg KH
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090731160544.GA3430@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox