On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 03:26:35 +0200, Eric Rannaud <eric.rannaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The reason for that original patch was that it is actually possible for the > uevent functions to return -ENOMEM, the uevent buffer being statically > allocated to BUFFER_SIZE (2048). So maybe -ENOMEM should still be propagated? We just don't want to fail device_add because of it. > It used to be 1024 but that was not > always enough and it was doubled a while ago [1]. Using add_uevent_var() > makes this less of a problem as such an overflow should be catched > cleanly [2]. Reminds me that I need to look into ccw_uevent :) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
