On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 09:17:41AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Grant Likely wrote: > >>> > >>> --- a/drivers/base/platform.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/base/platform.c > >>> @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int platform_uevent(struct device *dev, struct > >>> kobj_uevent_env *env) > >>> return rc; > >>> > >>> add_uevent_var(env, "MODALIAS=%s%s", PLATFORM_MODULE_PREFIX, > >>> - (pdev->id_entry) ? pdev->id_entry->name : pdev->name); > >>> + pdev->name); > >> > >> Yes, this looks like the right thing to do to me. Also, I think the > >> original code is suspect because it causes the uevent data to be > >> different after binding a driver to a device. > > > > Why different? The code matches (pdev->name == id->name) or > > (pdev->name == driver->name) so in both cases it should be equal to > > pdev->name. > > > > Are you or Greg taking this? > > This one is all Greg. Greg, do you want to take this patch through your driver core tree, or would you prefer to have it come through the xHCI tree? Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
