Hi Niels, Found time to look at this a little. Your patch for dynamic assignment if static fails works fine for our dynamic needs (I didn't test static usage), except I'd prefer to not print the informational error on every insmod of fusion.ko "fusion: unable to register major 250. Registered 246 instead", unless you think it is also important enough to add printing of the static major used for every insmod for consistency. :)
I glanced briefly through the André's Makefile and would need more time than I have available to test it out, so I cannot vouch for it at this point. FYI: I did notice a couple weeks ago that our own makefile updates (that were also provided in the complete patch of our changes sent earlier) did have a couple ignored errors. When I investigated, one of the issues I discovered was that the check-version macro/function did not appear to work properly. I tried to add different logic based on various kernels (more than two sets of logic) and the ifeq test use of it always returned the same result. :( So, as a workaround sufficient for our purposes we are simply testing the sublevel and assuming the major and minor are 2.26. Regards, Timothy -- Timothy Strelchun CE Software Engineering Digital Home Group Intel Corporation The views expressed above are my own and not those of Intel >-----Original Message----- >From: Niels Roest [mailto:ni...@directfb.org] >Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 10:42 AM >To: Strelchun, Timothy >Cc: 'directfb-dev@directfb.org' >Subject: Re: [directfb-dev] [PATCH] linux-fusion-8.1.1 Dynamic >Major Number improvement (was Re: Device ID issue in >linux-fusion module) > >Hi Timothy, > >supporting a dynamic major was something missing indeed. >I do propose to implement it slightly different, namely first >try the static major, and attempt dynamic assignment on failure. >This makes sure that systems without udev will still work. > >I attached my patch.. > >Regarding /dev/fusion/0, a recent change suggested by a fellow >mailing-lister now tries both variants. This did not yet >manage to find its way in a release. > >Also, I believe André Draszik provided an updated Makefile >which I did not fully check yet, but you might have a look to >see if it suits your needs, then I'll check it in. > >Not sure why you are having problems with FCEF_ONEWAY.. > >Thanks for the updates, >Greets >Niels _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list directfb-dev@directfb.org http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
