Return-path: Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:53302 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755885Ab0DWGBh convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2010 02:01:37 -0400 Received: by vws14 with SMTP id 14so440959vws.19 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:01:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1272002241.3737.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> References: <1271944442-9214-1-git-send-email-notasas@gmail.com> <1271954537.8469.15.camel@mj> <1272002241.3737.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:01:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat: fix uevent_suppress on 2.6.29 or older kernels To: Johannes Berg Cc: Grazvydas Ignotas , Pavel Roskin , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 23:47 +0300, Grazvydas Ignotas wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:33 PM, 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. >> >> there was already ifdef, old code: >>  #if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,30)) >>        dev_set_uevent_suppress(f_dev, 1); >>  #endif >> >> new code: >>  #if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,30)) >>        dev_set_uevent_suppress(f_dev, 1); >> #else >>        f_dev->uevent_suppress = 1; >>  #endif > > And the argument is that the new code should be > >        dev_set_uevent_suppress(f_dev, 1); > > and some header file should provide > > static inline void dev_set_uevent_suppress(...) > { >        f_dev->uevent_suppress = 1; > } > > which makes perfect sense. Although Luis merged it, a fix would be > useful. > > Luis, a patch changing firmware_class.c just entered the tree :P I made > it. Damn you, had to be you :) Luis