On 12/8/23 05:57, Wilken Gottwalt wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 14:11:44 +0100
Aleksa Savic <savicaleksa83@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2023-12-08 14:07:10 GMT+01:00, Aleksa Savic wrote:
When built-in to the kernel, the corsair-psu driver fails to register with
the following message:
"Driver 'corsair-psu' was unable to register with bus_type 'hid'
because the bus was not initialized."
Fix this by initializing the driver after the HID bus using
late_initcall(), as hwmon is built before HID.
Fixes: d115b51e0e56 ("hwmon: add Corsair PSU HID controller driver")
Signed-off-by: Aleksa Savic <savicaleksa83@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/hwmon/corsair-psu.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/corsair-psu.c b/drivers/hwmon/corsair-psu.c
index 904890598c11..48831a528965 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/corsair-psu.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/corsair-psu.c
@@ -899,7 +899,20 @@ static struct hid_driver corsairpsu_driver = {
.reset_resume = corsairpsu_resume,
#endif
};
-module_hid_driver(corsairpsu_driver);
+
+static int __init corsairpsu_hid_init(void)
+{
+ return hid_register_driver(&corsairpsu_driver);
+}
+
+static void __exit corsairpsu_hid_exit(void)
+{
+ hid_unregister_driver(&corsairpsu_driver);
+}
+
+/* When compiled into the kernel, initialize after the hid bus */
+late_initcall(corsairpsu_hid_init);
+module_exit(corsairpsu_hid_exit);
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
MODULE_AUTHOR("Wilken Gottwalt <wilken.gottwalt@xxxxxxxxxx>");
Woops! Just saw that the same fix was sent yesterday. Please disregard, sorry!
Aleksa
It is fine. I just start to wonder if there was a change in the subsystem. I
used the driver as built-in in the past for several months and never had that
issue. And now it is a real flood of reports.
Maybe there was a change in the build order, or some subtle change
in driver registration code. Question though is _when_ this changed.
It would be great if someone could bisect it. For example, bus registration
code has been changed significantly in v6.3. I am copying linux-input
and the hid maintainers for feedback.
Either case, I now have two patches and at least the first one was actually
tested, but no Reviewed-by: or Tested-by: for either of them. While that is
of course a formality, it would still be useful to show that it is not just
a random change.
Thanks,
Guenter
