| To: | Borsenkow Andrej <Andrej.Borsenkow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: Possible problem with devfs removable drives patch |
| From: | Richard Gooch <rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 18 Feb 2002 23:09:07 -0700 |
| Cc: | "'devfs mailing list'" <devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert.Fox@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <000001c1b90a$218af190$21c9ca95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <200202181922.g1IJMIs03173@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <000001c1b90a$218af190$21c9ca95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Borsenkow Andrej writes:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> > Odd. This should never happen. If you look at the code for
> > devfs_register_disc(), you will see the very first line:
> > if (dev->part[minor].de) return;
> >
> > which prevents duplicate registrations. The only way I can see this
> > failing is if the "disc" entry for a different device is registered,
> > but *the parent directory names are the same*. You can test this by
> > putting a debugging line two lines after the call to
> > devfs_generate_path() thus:
> > printk ("Constructed: \"%s\"", dirname + 3 + pos);
> >
> > and then send me the kernel messages between the PIIX4: message and
> > the error message you highlighted.
>
> You mean attached patch? Robert could you try it?
Yes, that patch is correct.
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: Possible problem with devfs removable drives patch, Borsenkow Andrej |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Possible problem with devfs removable drives patch, Borsenkow Andrej |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Possible problem with devfs removable drives patch, Borsenkow Andrej |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Possible problem with devfs removable drives patch, Borsenkow Andrej |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |