On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 02:34:50PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 01:59:53PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 07:01:50PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 01:02:38AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 12:51:27AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 08:17:41PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:54:17AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:33:13AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:35:51AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 08:48:46AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > So at least, unbind should fail as well as bind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That would be Greg's domain s it is driver core decision whether to > > > > > > > > > > allow unbinding platform devices registered with > > > > > > > > > > platform_driver_probe(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I do not see why that should not be allowed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because once you did unbind the device you are stuck (unless the driver > > > > > > > > is compiled as a module, but then you could just unload the module > > > > > > > > instead of unbinding). Disallowing unbind would allow discarding not > > > > > > > > only __devinit but __devexit sections when driver is built in which > > > > > > > > would make ebedded people happy[^Hier]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, good point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone do bind/unbind with platform devices today? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If not, a patch changing this would be welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How about this one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *ping* We need to resolve this, otherwise everyone who likes to rebind > > > > > i8042 in couse of STR/STD will be in trouble. > > > > > > > > Sorry, am in Tokyo right now. > > > > > > > > I like this patch, and will queue it up, but it's too late for .32, it > > > > will have to wait for .33. > > > > > > > > > > Greg, > > > > > > I hope you will reconsider. The patch is extremely small but without it > > > I am afraid many people whose distributions blindly rebind i8042 on > > > suspend/resume will lose their keyboards and mice now that i8042 uses > > > platform_driver_probe()... > > > > What distros do something like that automatically? > > It looks SUSE recommends to do so in one of the Wikis.. There certainly > lots of recommendations to do so in case of keyboard resume troubles all > over the forums (Ubunto, Gentoo, other random ones). > > > And this patch will > > not solve that problem, just forbid it from happening, right? > > > > It will prevent unbind from happening so that users who have suspend and > resume working properly but who have bind/unbind in their suspend/resume > scripts regardless will not run into trouble. > > This still leaves users whose suspend/resume don't work by default but I > would rather fix their boxes properly instead of relying on that > workaround. Ok, fair enough, I'll queue it up for .32. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
