On 06-02-2007 22:57, Andrew Morton wrote: ... > First time slattach is run to set up a SLIP line all is ok. > If slattach process is then killed and restarted it fails with message: > SLIP_set_disc(1): File exists > Problem still occurs in 2.6.20rc6 kernel > > dmesg shows: > object_add failed for sl0 with -EEXIST, don't try to register things > with the same name in the same directory. > [<c01b7b54>] kobject_add+0x147/0x16d > [<c0211209>] class_device_add+0x9d/0x3b3 > [<c022829d>] register_netdevice+0x21a/0x2d0 > [<c8903213>] slip_open+0x3a1/0x4e2 [slip] > [<c01fc709>] tty_ioctl+0x922/0xbac ... > Steps to reproduce: > (requires a serial port but nothing needs to be attached to it): > # slattach -L -vd -p slip -s 115200 /dev/ttyS0 ... > slip started on /dev/ttyS0 interface sl0 > > Above is OK, now kill process with CTRL-C > > slattach: tty_set_speed: 0 > # slattach -L -vd -p slip -s 115200 /dev/ttyS0 ... > SLIP_set_disc(1): File exists ... > I believe this is called by this changeset : > http://www2.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.17.y.git;a=commit;h=b17a7c179dd3ce7d04373fddf660eda21efc9db9
I think Martin is probably right here. It would be useful to check if time has anything to do with this and wait longer (e.g. >= 1 min.) before the second slattach. Anyway, even if there is some other reason, the above trace shows (IMHO) some inconsistency in register/ unregister_netdevice: if class_device_add is reached it means the name is valid (so was unregistered) and EEXIST from netdev_register_sysfs is wrong about the state of this device. So maybe there should be some warning plus some delayed action instead of register cancelled? Regards, Jarek P. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
