At Mon, 14 Feb 2005 11:34:13 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 08:24:29PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Mon, 14 Feb 2005 11:06:19 -0800, > > Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > As a result, I have committed the attached patch to libata-2.6. In > > > > many > > > > cases, it is a "semantic fix", addressing the case > > > > > > > > * pci_request_regions() indicates hardware is in use > > > > * we rudely disable the in-use hardware > > > > > > > > that would not occur in practice. > > > > > > > > But better safe than sorry. Code cuts cut-n-pasted all over the place. > > > > > > > > I'm hoping one or two things will happen now: > > > > * janitors fix up the other PCI drivers along these lines > > > > * improve the PCI API so that pci_request_regions() is axiomatic > > > > > > Do you have any suggestions for how to do this? > > > > How about to add an exclusiveness check in pci_enable_device()? > > Most drivers suppose that the given pci resources are exclusively > > available. > > You mean only allow pci_enable_device() to work for the first caller of > it? I don't see how that would help this issue out.
Well, for example, add a new pointer to indicate the driver accessing exclusively. And pci_enable_device() (maybe a new variant would be better for compatibility) checks whether this is free. The second caller wouldn't reach even to pci_request_regions() because of this check. So, no side-effect of pci_disable_device() in the error path. Takashi - 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/
