From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755423Ab2CMX0U (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:26:20 -0400 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:36072 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754106Ab2CMX0S (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:26:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201203132042.07794.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201203032122.36745.chunkeey@googlemail.com> <20120309233659.GA21256@kroah.com> <201203132042.07794.rjw@sisk.pl> From: Kay Sievers Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:25:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware loader: don't cancel _nowait requests when helper is not yet available To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Greg KH , Christian Lamparter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Linus Torvalds , Linux PM mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 20:42, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, March 11, 2012, Kay Sievers wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 00:36, Greg KH wrote: >> > What does uevent have to do with things here? >> >> I don't think that the firmware loader should care about the >> usermodehelper at all, and that stuff fiddling should just be removed >> from the firmware class. > > It's there to warn people that their drivers do stupid things like > loading frimware during system resume, which is guaranteed not to work. > > IOW, it's there very much on purpose. Using the /sbin/hotplug is no case that needs any warning. It' such a broken model these days, that firmware loading is the least problem that occurs with it. >> Forking /sbin/hotplug is disabled by default, it is a broken concept, >> and it cannot work reliably on today's systems. >> >> Firmware is not loaded by /sbin/hotplug since many years, but by udev >> or whatever service handles uevents, like ueventd on android. > > Which I'm not sure why is relevant here. It is relevant in the sense that the firmware loader should not even know that a uevent *can* cause a usermodehelper exec() if it runs in legacy mode. The firmware loader just has no business in fiddling with the details of driver core legacy stuff. I don't think his warning makes much sense. Kay