Re: [PATCH v2] dgnc: Don't save boards in memory that have failed to initialize
From: Greg KH
Date: Sat Mar 14 2015 - 04:44:56 EST
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 04:55:55PM -0400, Mark Hounschell wrote:
> On 03/12/2015 12:14 PM, Giedrius StatkeviÄius wrote:
> >On 2015.03.12 12:08, Greg KH wrote:
> >>On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 06:29:38PM +0200, Giedrius StatkeviÄius wrote:
> >>>Remove BOARD_FAILED and don't save dgnc_boards which failed to
> >>>Assign the result of kzalloc() to brd in dgnc_found_board() and only put
> >>>it in the dgnc_Board if it successfully initializes. Also, remove
> >>>BOARD_FAILED enum and all ifs that check for it. Finally, remove one
> >>>final place where state was set to BOARD_FAILED which was even redundant
> >>>before this patch.
> >>>Signed-off-by: Giedrius StatkeviÄius <giedrius.statkevicius@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>v2: Remove "brd = dgnc_Board[dgnc_NumBoards];" line which I forgot to do
> >>>in the first version
> >>> drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.c | 20 ++------------------
> >>> drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.h | 3 +--
> >>> drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_mgmt.c | 5 +----
> >>> drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c | 8 --------
> >>> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> >>>diff --git a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.c b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.c
> >>>index fa1ee79..075727d 100644
> >>>--- a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.c
> >>>+++ b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_driver.c
> >>>@@ -401,8 +401,7 @@ static int dgnc_found_board(struct pci_dev *pdev, int id)
> >>> unsigned long flags;
> >>> /* get the board structure and prep it */
> >>>- dgnc_Board[dgnc_NumBoards] = kzalloc(sizeof(*brd), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>- brd = dgnc_Board[dgnc_NumBoards];
> >>>+ brd = kzalloc(sizeof(*brd), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>You've done a great job here, but...
> >>Yeah, sorry...
> >>I really want to see this whole "static list of boards/cards" go away.
> >>There should not be any need for that in any in-kernel driver. Your
> >>patch here is a sign that things are really wrong with this whole static
> >>array mess.
> >>So could you do that instead? I don't want to take patches around this
> >>whole "board state" mess anymore, as it should all not be needed at all.
> >>If you need pointers on what needs to be done here, just let me know.
> >>greg k-h
> >I can try :) But my main concern is the lack of dgnc driver maintainers
> >activity and that I don't own the hardware this driver is written for as
> >it's quite expensive (cheapest cards I've found start at 300$~) and I
> >can't afford it ATM. But I guess if I keep the patches small and logical
> >everything will be okay.
> I am on the maintainers list and actually have hardware. I have just been so
> swamped the last few months that I haven't been able to do ANYTHING here.
> Even work on the dgap driver that I was working on, I just haven't had the
> time. I can tell you that the dgnc driver does NOT work at all and hasn't
> worked since it was introduced into staging by Greg.
Really? It's always been broken? Why don't we just delete the thing?
> Greg, while I'm here, how can we get Digi firmware into the kernel firmware
> tree? The dgap card is useless without it and I suspect the dgnc is as well.
Submit a patch to the linux-firmware git tree with the firmware in it.
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/