[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1187027138.6698.239.camel@violet>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:45:38 +0200
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To: Markus Rechberger <markus.rechberger@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Firmware class name collision
Hi Markus,
> >> following patch fixes the i2c name collision with i2c-dev.
> >>
> >> http://mcentral.de/wiki/index.php/Bugtracker#i2c_core_problem
> >>
> >> This issue has been experienced with em28xx and saa7133 based devices.
> >> I discussed that problem with Jean Delvare a while ago and he proposed
> >> to add a prefix to the class name.
> >>
> >> http://mcentral.de/~mrec/patches/firmware_class_name_collision.diff
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Rechberger <markus.rechberger@....com>
> >>
> >> index b24efd4..bfc54a1 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> >> @@ -297,8 +297,7 @@ firmware_class_timeout(u_long data)
> >>
> >> static inline void fw_setup_device_id(struct device *f_dev, struct
> >> device *dev)
> >> {
> >> - /* XXX warning we should watch out for name collisions */
> >> - strlcpy(f_dev->bus_id, dev->bus_id, BUS_ID_SIZE);
> >> + snprintf(f_dev->bus_id, BUS_ID_SIZE, "fw-%s", dev->bus_id);
> >> }
> >>
> >
> > I would prefer if we use "firmware-%s" since the "fw" might collide with
> > the new Firewire stack. Please change that and I agree.
> >
> >
>
> firmware-%s sounds more informative and cannot be mistaken with firewire
> yes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Rechberger <markus.rechberger@....com>
Acked-by: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Regards
Marcel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists