[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120925192211.GA24750@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:22:11 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PNP: Unbind drivers if the new driver matches _HID
rather than _CID
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:04:25PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com> wrote:
> Do you know of any scenarios besides this IPMI one where there's the
> possibility of two drivers matching the same device? If so, does the
> detach/attach process work reasonably? My worry is that drivers don't
> normally give up devices, so the detach path is not well exercised.
> And I don't know what happens to any users of the device during the
> switch. For example, if something was using a TPM and we replaced the
> driver, what does that look like to the user?
Yeah, this could definitely happen with TPM - tpm_infinion could
displace tpm_tis. This actually flags up something kind of obviously
broken in the TPM code, since tpm_infineon comes *after* tpm_tis in the
link order despite being more specific. Winning. It looks like there's a
valid tpm_release function, but I'll find an infineon machine and figure
out whether it actually works or not.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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