Re: Why does printk helps PCMCIA card to initialise?

[Vicente Feito]

Hello

On Sunday 20 February 2005 11:44 am, you wrote:
>  
> diff -u -U 7 /linux-2.6.11-rc4.changed/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c 
> ../linux-2.6.11-rc4/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c
> --- /linux-2.6.11-rc4.changed/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c     
> 2005-02-20 11:37:39.000000000 +0100
> +++ ../linux-2.6.11-rc4/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c     2005-02-20 
> 02:16:48.000000000 +0100
> @@ -623,15 +623,14 @@
>         down(&rsrc_sem);
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PCI
>         if (s->cb_dev) {
>                 ret = pci_bus_alloc_resource(s->cb_dev->bus, res, num, 1,
>                                              min, 0, pcmcia_align, &data);
>         } else
>  #endif
> -        printk("This line will never be printed, but it helps!!!");
>                 ret = allocate_resource(&ioport_resource, res, num, min, 
What you're doing is forcing the execution of allocate_resource (&ioport... );
Cause adding the printk you're adding it's changing this:
else 
 ret = allocate_resource(...);
up(...);

by this:

else
 printk(...);
/*This is not executing inside the else clause no more,
 *so doesn't matter if s->cb_dev it's true or not, you're going with this*/
ret = allocate_resource(...); 
up(...);

You're changing the block inside the else clause.
It's not about upsetting the sem afaik.
I could be wrong though, and that'll be a terrible tragedy.
Of course this is as long as CONFIG_PCI it's evaluating true, is it?

Vicente.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/