On 10/21/2013 08:32 AM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Prarit Bhargava <pra...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> And why don't you pass FW_ACTION_HOTPLUG? and you are sure >>> that udev isn't required to handle your microcode update request? >>> >> >> AFAICT in both cases, udev wasn't required to handle the cpu microcode >> update. >> Both drivers use CMH to load the firmware which removes the need for udev to >> do >> anything. Admittedly maybe I've missed some odd use case but I don't think >> it >> is necessary. > > OK, so I guess the CMH still need uevent to get notified, right?
The code as it is _currently_ written does not use uevents to load the processor firmware. ie) call_usermodehelper does not need uevent to get notified, so I think FW_ACTION_NOHOTPLUG is correct. P. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
