2002-09-12 11:44:19

by Adam J. Richter

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Patch: linux-2.5.34/drivers/ide/ide.c was building list of drives in reverse order

ata_attach in linux-2.5.34/drivers/ide/ide.c builds a list of
IDE drives that do not yet have a device driver bound to them, in case
ide-disk, ide-scsi, or whatever driver you want to use is not loaded
yet.

The problem was that ata_attach was adding to the head of
the list, so the list was being built in reverse order. So, if
you had two IDE disks, and ide-disk was a loadable module, the
devfs entries for the disks would be numbered in reverse (the
first disk would be /dev/discs/disc1, and the second would be
/dev/discs/disc0).

The follow patch fixes the problem by changing the relevant
list_add to list_add_tail. Incidentally, the generic code
in drivers/base/ already does it this way.

--
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road
[email protected] \ / Milpitas, California 95035
+1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
"Free Software For The Rest Of Us."


Attachments:
(No filename) (970.00 B)
ide.diff (474.00 B)
Download all attachments

2002-09-12 11:48:36

by Jens Axboe

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Patch: linux-2.5.34/drivers/ide/ide.c was building list of drives in reverse order

On Thu, Sep 12 2002, Adam J. Richter wrote:
> ata_attach in linux-2.5.34/drivers/ide/ide.c builds a list of
> IDE drives that do not yet have a device driver bound to them, in case
> ide-disk, ide-scsi, or whatever driver you want to use is not loaded
> yet.
>
> The problem was that ata_attach was adding to the head of
> the list, so the list was being built in reverse order. So, if
> you had two IDE disks, and ide-disk was a loadable module, the
> devfs entries for the disks would be numbered in reverse (the
> first disk would be /dev/discs/disc1, and the second would be
> /dev/discs/disc0).
>
> The follow patch fixes the problem by changing the relevant
> list_add to list_add_tail. Incidentally, the generic code
> in drivers/base/ already does it this way.

Patch looks right (its obviously the right thing to do), thanks

--
Jens Axboe