On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 04:46:04AM -0400, Natarajan Gurumoorthy wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Guenter Roeck > <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I have seen the list. I don't think you should fix everything in one go. > > First step might be to get the w83697hf and it87 to work together, then > > go from there. > > > > Is there a reason for loading (or trying to load) both the it87 and > > the w83697hf driver at the same time ? Those drivers are usually only > > loaded if the respective chip is known to exist. If there is no reason > > to try loading both drivers, a simple workaround would be to not do it. > > > Guenter, > I agree the above should never happen. The only way the 2 > drivers will be loaded at the same time is a misconfigured kernel > where these 2 drivers get built and the rc scripts end up loading them > too. If we are agreed that I suggest we make the superio_enter routine > be the following: > > static inline void > superio_enter(void) > { > /* > * Reserve REG and REG + 1 for exclusive access. > */ > while (!request_muxed_region(REG, 2, WATCHDOG_NAME)) > continue; > At least for my part, I would not agree to that. If another driver misbehaves and does not release the region, one of your CPU cores will be stuck in an endless loop. > outb(0x87, REG); > outb(0x01, REG); > outb(0x55, REG); > outb(0x55, REG); > } > > What I am suggesting is not returning an error and instead keep > calling "request_muxed_region" till it succeeds. If superio_enter > returns an error then we will have to rewrite a large chunk of > it8712f_wdt to deal with it. There are 8-9 calls to superio_enter. We > will have supreio_enter returning errors at awkward places in the > driver where the current logic has no code to deal with errors. > Can't help it. I browsed through it earlier and didn't think it was that bad. Just pass the error on to the next level until you can return it. Guenter > In case of properly written drivers the while loop will eventually > exit. I agree this is ugly as sin but it limits the perturbation of > the driver. Feedback please. > > Regards > Nat > > > > Thanks, > > Guenter > > > > > > > > -- > Regards > Nat Gurumoorthy AB6SJ _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors