On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 17:11 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 09:58:08AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:19:18 +0200, > > "Kay Sievers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >> Removing the dev->parent->bus check fixes it: > > > > > > Yes, let's remove the check, I will check now if we possibly need to > > > fix more than this or only the block-device patch. > > > > It seems this is the only place we check for dev->parent->bus in the > > current git tree. > > > > Patch below. > > Thanks for figuring this out, I'll add this to my tree. > > So what is the input layer doing so differently from everyone else here? > Is it correct? (sorry, am at a conference this week, so can't dig into > it as much as I would like to until Friday...)
It was the only place where we stacked (had a hierarchy of) class devices. We got a class device being a child of another class device. We never did anything like that and it was the reason to go for a unified tree at /sys/devices/ instead of putting small hierarchy trees all over the place, which can never be changed later, as they are the defined entry points into the device tree. Kay - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
