On 10/12/2013 07:18 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
If we have two ACPI enumerated devices, they have following modalias:
i2c-device0: i2c:INTABCD:00
acpi:INTABCD
i2c-device1: i2c:INTABCD:01
acpi:INTABCD
Likelihood that some random I2C driver has INTABCD:00 or INTABCD:01 ids in
their list is minimal. However, when you turn it to this:
i2c-device0: i2c:INTABCD
acpi:INTABCD
i2c-device1: i2c:INTABCD
acpi:INTABCD
It might be possible that we get a match that isn't supposed to happen.
Well, OK it is pretty remote but anyway :-)
Well, name conflicts could occur of course but still I don't think we
should generate illegal or wrong modaliases. I'm not an udev expert but
I suppose trying to load nonexisting drivers (i2c_INTABCD:xy) could slow
booting a little and perhaps pollute needlessly error log compared to if
it can see that driver is already loaded or tries to load the same
driver again.
I don't think name conflicts can pose too big risk as they are trivial
to fix in sources and can be queued to stable too.
--
Jarkko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
