[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0802051059330.3110@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:09:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git patches] IDE updates part #4
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> * next part of IDE probing code re-organization saga
> (that would be me)
This seems to cause very irritating and bogus messages for me:
Probing IDE interface ide0...
Probing IDE interface ide1...
ide2: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide2: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide3: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide3: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide4: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide4: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide5: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide5: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide6: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide6: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide7: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide7: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide8: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide8: ports already in use, skipping probe
ide9: I/O resource 0x0-0x7 not free.
ide9: ports already in use, skipping probe
and that's just totally bogus. It shouldn't even request that region,
since it's not been allocated!
So that "ide_device_add_all()" is missing some checks. Should it check the
probe[] array like ideprobe_init() used to, or what?
Linus
--
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