Peter Hutterer wrote: > this code hasn't been touched for ages (it's even disabled by default). > hal.c came after this code, so the use of RemoveDevice is more legacy than > anything else. > > Have you tried DIDR? Does it work fine? If so I'll just amend your patch > before pushing. Not really tried it. It's a in recovery path anyway, so to test I would have to provoke error conditions somehow, which in turn doesn't really count as a realistic test.
Looking at the xf86 impl, we really should be calling DIDR instead. The kdrive impl needs a RD(..., TRUE) fix too BTW. Others are stubs. I'm all for DIDR, since otherwise the xf86 path leaks resources. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
