Re: [Bug 201609] sysfs duplicate filename on driver loading Adaptec AIC-9410W

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 11:43 +0000, bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201609
> 
> Emil Velikov (emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx) changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>                  CC|                            |emil.l.velikov@gmail
> .com
> 
> --- Comment #5 from Emil Velikov (emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx) ---
> The other five files ({subsystem_,}{vendor,device} and class) do not
> have a prefix, so the more reasonable thing was it not add one for
> the revision file.

No, it wasn't.  This is the problem.  In the early days we all grabbed
un-namespaced names in this directory.  If you add another un-
namespaced file, a clash is likely to happen which has serious
consequences.  If you want to add a generically named file, you have to
check all the drivers before doing it.  If you clash with a file that's
in use by userspace, your new addition gets reverted because we can't
rename an in-use file because it's an exported ABI.

> That said, I did spend a lot of time going through the Documentation
> looking for guidelines, rules or restrictions that should be applied
> and could not find any. The PCI subsystem maintainer did not suggest
> adding a prefix either, so I would not use "blatently silly" here.

Either you prefix the addition or you check every driver ... neither
happened in this case.

> On a more practical side - the aic94xx driver custom revision file
> solves the exact same problem my patch does. Admittedly, aic94xx
> lacks the leading "0x" for the hexadecimal number provided.
> 
> My personal inclination is that we'd want to check if existing
> userspace
> requires the leading 0x and if so to what extend:
>  - cosmetic - remove the aic94xx code, update userspace
>  - unused - remove the aic94xx code
>  - major impact - the aic94xx driver removes the generic revision
> file, before setting it's own
> 
> Does that sound reasonable, am I missing something?

I think we're safe and the aic file isn't used from userspace, so just
renaming the aic revision file should work.

James




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux