Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764295AbXE2H55 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2007 03:57:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753208AbXE2H5t (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2007 03:57:49 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]:51338 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755534AbXE2H5s (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2007 03:57:48 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.22-rc2-mm1 From: Kay Sievers To: Cornelia Huck Cc: Tilman Schmidt , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH In-Reply-To: <20070528192224.0cf237d0@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> References: <20070523004233.5ae5f6fd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <46585953.80200@imap.cc> <20070526090117.dda72286.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <465A033C.3070400@imap.cc> <3ae72650705271541o2c3755edwdc769883e79820e5@mail.gmail.com> <20070528192224.0cf237d0@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 09:56:45 +0200 Message-Id: <1180425405.7208.15.camel@lov.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+r7S+hN3I4zzm6MUdthSrFZU54Ujbjrz5t2+U a6ovX80ic9x3xwG3J2N+R0J2ehE7v71uuFY+UPkYEXIEznAXW4 c0jkhVtO2w1hEo74IO9+VZZVNl3MJv6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1702 Lines: 42 On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 19:22 +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:41:19 +0200, > "Kay Sievers" wrote: > > > Cornelia, > > in the patch is: > > + if (dev->kobj.parent == &dev->class->subsys.kobj) > > + return 0; > > > > which will skip the creation of the "device"-link, right? > > Uh, looking at the code again, this doesn't seem to be what I wanted :( > > > But still, I don't think the transaction-style of error handling is > > what we want, it's for some critical subsystems the equivalent of > > adding PANIC(), and this just for a failing symlink-creation. I think > > we just want to print the to the logs, and not let the whole core > > device registration fail entirely. > > Hm, but failure to create a symlink usually signifies something's really > wrong (no memory, or an object is there which shouldn't)? Sure, but this is core code, which is used by _all_ drivers and _all_ devices. Subsystems can decide to panic if this appropriate, but generic core code should probably not make such decisions. With this change, a single failing symlink (or attribute) for a scsi/ide/block/... device may crash the whole box during bootup. I'm not sure that this is what we want. It's a failure that should be logged (the patch doesn't even add that), but there is probably no reason to refuse the creation of a device, if something non-vital like a symlink or attribute fails to be created. Thanks, Kay - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/