Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 09:22 -0700, Greg KH a écrit : > On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 05:53:28PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote: > > Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 ?? 11:41 -0400, Alan Stern a ??crit : > > > > > This is a curious aspect of the driver model core. Should failure of a > > > driver to bind be considered serious enough to cause device_add to fail? > > > The current answer is Yes unless the driver's probe routine returns > > > -ENODEV or -ENXIO, in which case the failure is not considered serious. > > > > Indeed. I've also tracked my problem down to the hid core which returns > > -EIO when it fails to drive an unknown HID device, instead of a more > > logical -ENODEV (this is not a failure to init a known device, but > > rather the impossibility to init an unknown device). > > > > The patch below solves the problem for me: > > Damm, beat me by a few minutes :)
:) > Yes, this is the proper fix for this. > > But to answer Alan's main question, I think you are correct, we should > not fail device_add if binding a device fails. I can see this causing a > lot of very difficult problems in the future (including the fact that > I've been hitting this bug with a new driver I'm writing and didn't even > realize it...) > > So, I'll apply this one, and revert the main part of Hannes's patch too. Thanks. Stelian. -- Stelian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
