Hello Juampe,
juampe wrote:
> Manu Abraham wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> For sure we need to go to (2), providing a good long-term
>>> solution, but
>>> we may send a patch, like (1) to kernel 2.6.15 and 2.6.16, while we
>>> don't have a definitive solution.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Attached is a patch for option (1) i am already on option (2)
>> patch applies cleanly against 2.6.15 as well as V4L-DVB CVS.
>>
>>
>> bt878.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> bt878.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> Manu
>>
>
> Hi Manu.
> Good job!
> Your patch, i'ts well defined ( as (1)), and whitelist works well. But
> the bt878 resource is not completely free now.
> (see dmesg first attach)
>
> ---------------
>
> But, it's important to return something obscene :P.
>
> ---------
>
> --- linux-2.6.15/drivers/media/dvb/bt8xx/bt878.c 2006-01-20
> 07:40:11.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.15/drivers/media/dvb/bt8xx/bt878.c 2006-01-20
> 07:28:48.000000000 +0100
> @@ -435,6 +435,7 @@ static int __devinit bt878_probe(struct
>
> if (!has_dvb) {
> printk("%s: card id=[0x%x], Unknown
> card.\nExiting..\n", __func__, cardid);
> + result = -EINVAL;
> goto fail0;
> }
>
Can you please send me your Signed-off-by line .. ?
Manu
