On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 07:35:03AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > >>> Thanks for your analysis and suggested patch, I'll take a look at this. > >> > >> Thanks for your help. If we can't find something, I'll just do a bisect this > >> weekend. > > > > Frankly, at this point, I'm beginning suspect that the procfs stuff > > simply never warned at some point in the past and that the IDE > > code has had this problem for a while. > > I just confirmed that the procfs code only started warning on removal > of non-present entries this past March, so basically the IDE code has > silently had this problem of not actually creating any of it's procfs > nodes for some time now. > > Wolfram I'll look into your patch some more and integrate it, thanks. I am still puzzled why my hard-disk does have these entries then. I am away from that laptop currently, but will check later this evening. Regards, Wolfram -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
