From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752125Ab1A0SMx (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:12:53 -0500 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:59814 "EHLO ironport2-out.pppoe.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751313Ab1A0SMv (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:12:51 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBAHtEQU1Ld/sX/2dsb2JhbAAMhAjNIJBzgSODOHQEhRc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,387,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="89440940" Message-ID: <4D41B5A0.70704@teksavvy.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:12:48 -0500 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Torokhov CC: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.36/2.6.37: broken compatibility with userspace input-utils ? References: <20110125205453.GA19896@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D3F4804.6070508@redhat.com> <4D3F4D11.9040302@teksavvy.com> <20110125232914.GA20130@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20110126020003.GA23085@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D403855.4050706@teksavvy.com> <4D40C3D7.90608@teksavvy.com> <4D40C551.4020907@teksavvy.com> <20110127021227.GA29709@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D40E41D.2030003@teksavvy.com> <20110127163931.GA1825@core.coreip.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20110127163931.GA1825@core.coreip.homeip.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11-01-27 11:39 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 10:18:53PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: >> No, it does not seem to segfault when I unload/reload ir-kbd-i2c >> and then invoke it by hand with the same parameters. >> Quite possibly the environment is different when udev invokes it, >> and my strace attempt with udev killed the system, so no info there. >> > > Hmm, what about compiling with debug and getting a core then? Sure. debug is easy, -g, but you'll have to tell me how to get it do produce a core dump. Cheers