aic7* claims all checked EISA io ranges (was: [[email protected]: Returned mail: see transcript for details])
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 aic7* claims all checked EISA io ranges (was: [[email protected]: Returned mail: see transcript for details])
Hmm, vger does not like the driver name of the Adaptec driver. ;-)
Robert
----- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery Subsystem <[email protected]> -----
[...]
Final-Recipient: RFC822; [email protected]
Action: failed
Status: 5.7.1
Remote-MTA: DNS; vger.kernel.org
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 5.7.1 The Triple-X in subject is way too often associated with junk email, please rephrase. ; S263532AbTDHGof
Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 08:56:12 +0200 (MEST)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 08:55:41 +0200
To: "Justin T. Gibbs" <[email protected]>,
Marcelo Tosatti <[email protected]>,
Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>,
Alan Cox <[email protected]>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <[email protected]>, Kurt Garloff <[email protected]>,
Hubert Mantel <[email protected]>, linux-kernel <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH] aic7xxx claims all checked EISA io ranges
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
From: Robert Schiele <[email protected]>
Hello.
Some days ago a bug was introduced in aic7xxx by applying the aic7xxx driver upgrade to both the 2.4 and the 2.5 tree. This bug makes aic7xxx to claim all the ioport ranges that he checks while scanning for EISA cards. Takashi Iwai and me iterated over the sources to finally find that the result value check of the request_region() is negated.
Because of that the following patch goes to Justin to fix it in driver development tree, to the official tree maintainers to fix it there, and to Alan, because you sent this driver update to Marcelo, so I assume the same problem is in your tree.
The patch applies to both, the 2.4 and the 2.5 tree.
And now for the trivial but obvious patch:
drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7770_osm.c +1 -1
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@continue ;request_region (eisaBase,AHC_EISA_IOSIZE ,"aic7xxx" );#else -if (request_region (eisaBase,AHC_EISA_IOSIZE ,"aic7xxx" ) !=0 ) +if (request_region (eisaBase,AHC_EISA_IOSIZE ,"aic7xxx" ) ==0 )continue ;#endif
Robert
Signature · 11 lines
Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2517 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:[email protected] ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2517 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:[email protected]
Quoted 4 lines
Hello.
Some days ago a bug was introduced in aic7xxx by applying the aic7xxx driver upgrade to both the 2.4 and the 2.5 tree.
This particular defect was corrected in all versions of the aic7xxx driver released by me after March 9th. See the driver CHANGELOG in the driver source distribution for details.
http://people.FreeBSD.org/~gibbs/linux/SRC/
--
Justin
Quoted 10 lines · Justin T. Gibbs
Quoted 4 lines
Hello.
Some days ago a bug was introduced in aic7xxx by applying the aic7xxx driver upgrade to both the 2.4 and the 2.5 tree.
This particular defect was corrected in all versions of the aic7xxx driver released by me after March 9th. See the driver CHANGELOG in the driver source distribution for details.
Thanks for your note. Hope you didn't feel offended. At least this was not my intention. I just wanted to notify all people related to the affected driver.
So it's up to the kernel tree maintainers to bring this fix into their trees.
Robert
Signature · 2 lines
Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2517 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:[email protected]
Quoted 5 lines · Robert Schiele
Thanks for your note. Hope you didn't feel offended. At least this was not my intention. I just wanted to notify all people related to the affected driver.
So it's up to the kernel tree maintainers to bring this fix into their trees.
Maintainers submit changes to the Linux kernel tree, not vice versa. Its push not pull
Quoted 9 lines · Robert Schiele
Quoted 5 lines
Thanks for your note. Hope you didn't feel offended. At least this was not my intention. I just wanted to notify all people related to the affected driver.
So it's up to the kernel tree maintainers to bring this fix into their trees.
Maintainers submit changes to the Linux kernel tree, not vice versa. Its push not pull
As far as the 2.4.X series is concerned, pushing has not helped. I've seen spelling fixes and incorrorct changes get accepted from non maintainers "instantly", while the maintainers changes are not accepted. Considering how long it took for the last set of driver changes to make it from -ac into kernel.org, I just assumed that this strategy was also failing. Is that really the only way to get updates into Marcelo's tree?
--
Justin
Quoted 9 lines · Alan Cox
Quoted 5 lines · Robert Schiele
Thanks for your note. Hope you didn't feel offended. At least this was not my intention. I just wanted to notify all people related to the affected driver.
So it's up to the kernel tree maintainers to bring this fix into their trees.
Maintainers submit changes to the Linux kernel tree, not vice versa. Its push not pull
Well, the reason why I sent the patch to both, the maintainer of the driver and the maintainers of the trees, is that the maintainers of the trees have the opportunity to fix one of the more important drivers before they release a new "official" version that is broken here, and I think that the change is quite obvious.
To clarify this: I don't care whether and when the fix goes to the official trees, because I have the fix for my personal kernel builds and Hubert Mantel has it for the SuSE builds, so it Works-For-Me(TM).
Robert
Signature · 2 lines
Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2517 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:[email protected]