Re: [patch 2.6.12-rc3] modifications in firmware_class.c to support nohotplug

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 11:23:30AM -0500, Abhay_Salunke@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:10 AM
> > To: Salunke, Abhay
> > Cc: dtor_core@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> akpm@xxxxxxxx;
> > Domsch, Matt; ranty@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.12-rc3] modifications in firmware_class.c to
> > support nohotplug
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 11:04:09AM -0500, Abhay_Salunke@xxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> > > > I think it would be better if you just have request_firmware and
> > > > request_firmware_nowait accept timeout parameter that would
> override
> > > > default timeout in firmware_class. 0 would mean use default,
> > > > MAX_SCHED_TIMEOUT - wait indefinitely.
> > >
> > > But we still need to avoid hotplug being invoked as we need it be a
> > > manual process.
> > 
> > No, hotplug can happen just fine (it happens loads of times today for
> > things that people don't care about.)
> > 
> If hotplug happens the complete function is called which makes the
> request_firmware return with a failure. 

If this was true, then the current code would not work at all.
-
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/