* David Brownell | 2008-04-15 11:09:43 [-0700]: >On Tuesday 15 April 2008, Sebastian Siewior wrote: >> * David Brownell | 2008-04-14 16:23:36 [-0700]: >> >> >On Monday 14 April 2008, Sebastian Siewior wrote: >> >> Without this it is possible to unload the SPI-driver while an >> >> spidev user open()ed the spidev device. >> > >> >Does that misbehave in any way? That sort of unloading of >> >> Yes. Unload, read() -> Ooops. > >What's the oops, and with which controller driver? I can't dump the Ooops right now. The conter driver is my own which is based on mpc52xx_psc_spi.c.
>If the adapter is unloaded it's *supposed* to first complete >all pending transfers (and prevent submission of new ones). Yes, but the problem here is (I thing) that spidev doesn't know that the driver is gone. spi_async() (what is called straight from spidev_read() with no checks in between) is always using spi->master->* even if the master is gone. >And removing the subsidiary devices is supposed to unbind >them ... though looking at it quickly, I suspect that the >"spidev" driver doesn't check for unbound devices in its >various I/O paths. Aha. So you mean that the read function which was spidev_read() while the controller was available should point to something else once the controller is gone? > >So this sounds like a bug in the controller driver, or else >in how spidev handles unbind. I try to look later at spidev once I find something that does a similar job and works as expected.... >- Dave Sebastian ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ spi-devel-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general
