Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:42214 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754958Ab0DVUvB (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:51:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat: fix uevent_suppress on 2.6.29 or older kernels From: Pavel Roskin To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: Grazvydas Ignotas , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1271944442-9214-1-git-send-email-notasas@gmail.com> <1271954537.8469.15.camel@mj> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:50:59 -0400 Message-Id: <1271969459.11483.3.camel@mj> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 13:33 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 09:33 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > >> How was this compiling for older kernels before then? > > > > Compiling was fine, but loading the firmware was failing sometimes. I'm > > glad somebody figured it out. Thank you, Grazvydas! > > OK Applied. I'm still puzzled, if it compiled, then that means > dev_set_uevent_suppress() was being defined somehow for older kernels. It's wasn't defined. The function just wasn't called for older kernels. "#if" was there; the patch added "#else". It's a great example how simply-minded commenting out missing functions can lead to a hard problem, a race condition. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin