RE: [patch 2.6.12-rc3] modifications in firmware_class.c to support nohotplug

[Abhay_Salunke]

> > > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 11:04:09AM -0500, Abhay_Salunke@xxxxxxxx
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > I think it would be better if you just have request_firmware
and
> > > > > > request_firmware_nowait accept timeout parameter that would
> > > override
> > > > > > default timeout in firmware_class. 0 would mean use default,
> > > > > > MAX_SCHED_TIMEOUT - wait indefinitely.
> > > > >
> > > > > But we still need to avoid hotplug being invoked as we need it
be
> a
> > > > > manual process.
> > > >
> > > > No, hotplug can happen just fine (it happens loads of times
today
> for
> > > > things that people don't care about.)
> > > >
> > > If hotplug happens the complete function is called which makes the
> > > request_firmware return with a failure.
> >
> > If this was true, then the current code would not work at all.
> >
> 
> What Abhay is trying to say is that default firmware.agent when it
> does not find requested firmware file writes -1 (abort) to "loading"
> attribute causing firmware_request to fail.
> 
> I think it should be fixed in firmware.agent though, not in kernel -
> the agent shoudl just recognoze that sometimes not having firmware
> file is ok.
> 
Greg, any inputs on whether we change firmware.agent or we patch
firmware_class.c?

Thanks
Abhay
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/