On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 05:53:28PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote: > Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 ?? 11:41 -0400, Alan Stern a ??crit : > > > This is a curious aspect of the driver model core. Should failure of a > > driver to bind be considered serious enough to cause device_add to fail? > > The current answer is Yes unless the driver's probe routine returns > > -ENODEV or -ENXIO, in which case the failure is not considered serious. > > Indeed. I've also tracked my problem down to the hid core which returns > -EIO when it fails to drive an unknown HID device, instead of a more > logical -ENODEV (this is not a failure to init a known device, but > rather the impossibility to init an unknown device). > > The patch below solves the problem for me:
Damm, beat me by a few minutes :) Yes, this is the proper fix for this. But to answer Alan's main question, I think you are correct, we should not fail device_add if binding a device fails. I can see this causing a lot of very difficult problems in the future (including the fact that I've been hitting this bug with a new driver I'm writing and didn't even realize it...) So, I'll apply this one, and revert the main part of Hannes's patch too. Thanks for tracking this down. greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
