We could consider buggy the caller which asks for the same device name
more than once, without unregistering the first device. But better safe
If they ask for the same name we certainly should. Probably we should
error that request and use WARN_ON() to shame the offender in
kerneloops.org.
Hi,
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 17:03 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 01:28:36PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:28:17 -0200
Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo casca...@holoscopio.com wrote:
The current dynamic allocation of minor number for misc devices
On 11/09/2009 01:28 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
The proposed solution uses the not yet reserved range from 64 to 127. If
more devices are needed, we may push 64 to 16. Moreover, if we don't
need to give priority to the higher numbers anymore, we can start using
the bitmap/bitops functions.
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 21:29:25 -0200
Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo casca...@holoscopio.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 08:02:57PM -0200, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
Is that a bugfix for the existing code?
If so, please split that out into a separate patch which we can
