Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] Add force_epp module option for parport_pc.
From: Matwey V. Kornilov
Date: Thu Jul 10 2014 - 03:57:08 EST
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 11:01:51AM +0400, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
From cf37d0cc4d51da5c0b368e1f5ab05082c041d1e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Matwey V. Kornilov" <matwey.kornilov@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:08:45 +0400
Subject: [PATCHv3 2/2] Add force_epp module option for parport_pc.
The detection of Intel EPP bug is known to produce much false positives.
The new option is introduced to force enable EPP in spite of the test result.
First of all, maybe I missed something fundamental, or did something
wrong, but I can't understand how is it going to break working systems? We
have current behaviour B0, and introduce an option switches between B0
(which is default value) and alternative behaviour B1. So, until you go to
/etc/modprobe.d to override defaults or modprobe with specific option the
current behaviour B0 is active. Am I not right here?
module parameters are horrid, how is someone supposed to know to use
I usually do `modinfo' to list existing options. Do I understand right
that description has to be added into Documentations also?
Why can't we "fix" the detection logic?
Initial check had been introduced in 1999 , however I am failed to find
any proves, because davej/history.git is missed. Initial committer is
unknown. The check fixes issue with the affected hardware (A) and
introduces new one with false-positive (F) hardware.
Now, there are no evidences of what hardware is affected (it seems to be
quite aged), and no owners of this hardware are known. So, If I had fixed
the detection logic (in one or another way), I would have not been able to
What I am trying to do here (as it is described in 0/2) is to allow people
with false-positive hardware somehow operate with it.
You just now broke systems that were working by forcing them to now set a module option
where previously they didn't
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/