FINALLY A RESPONSE HERE....^_^ yep...it's very strange... This should be a serious problem about pmem... BTW, I think that private_data pointer check in pmem_open is necessary.. I commented out that misc device patch instead...
hope more people here could share their experience of this problem On 6月29日, 下午6時17分, Shlomi Mor <shlomi....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I also see the exact same behavior. > I checked out the history of misc.c, and saw that initialization of > private_data field was added at kernel version 2.6.35. > I see that the problem still exists on android kernel 2.6.39 (http:// > android.git.kernel.org). > For now I just commented out the test for private_data inside > pmem_open... > > I agree it seems very strange... > > Thanks, > Shlomi > > On Jun 22, 12:35 pm, xxGrayxx <xgray...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > hi all experts. > > I am trying to port a sensor driver (implemented as a misc device) to > > our platform. > > The IP provider told us that Linux kernel patch 96412 (https:// > > patchwork.kernel.org/patch/96412/) must to be included, > > and what this patch does is "pass miscdevice pointer via file private > > data" in misc_open function (drivers/char/misc.c) > > > After I assign this patch to our kernel code, I found a problem ofpmemin > > open function. > > in pmem_open function of the file drivers/misc/pmem.c, non-null > > pointed of file->private_data is checked > > > if (file->private_data != NULL) > > return -1; > > > depends on what the patch 96412 does, above code will always return > > -1. > > > I found that these codes also exist on Android Open Source Project. > > I am wondering if this is a known issue or I have some > > misunderstanding of misc driver andpmembehavior?? -- unsubscribe: android-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com website: http://groups.google.com/group/android-kernel
