Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Feb 2012 22:50:33 +0100 | From | Holger Macht <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: dock_link_device is oopsy |
| |
On Sa 18. Feb - 13:03:34, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Sat, 18 Feb 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > > On Sa 18. Feb - 10:46:04, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > On Sat, 18 Feb 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > > > > How about that one? > > > > > > It's more broken than that. Here's my attempt. It boots on the > > > systems with dock_station_count 0, and it boots on my laptop with > > > dock_station_count 2; but I don't actually have any docking station, > > > so it still doesn't test very much (dock is 0 after the loop). > > > > Well, there doesn't have to actually exist a physical dock station (or > > bay device) for dock_station_count to be > 0. It just tells that the > > ACPI objects are present and thus the system is capable of it. > > > > So does this function actually also break on your laptop and you're > > getting the oops there, too? > > It oopsed on the 4-year-old Fujitsu-Siemens laptop whose dock_station_count > was 0. It did not oops on the new ThinkPad laptop whose dock_station_count > is 2, but no docks were found: so the function would only have been leaking > memory on that.
It should actually have successfully linked the dock to the device, if for instance you had a device in your bay. At least this is working fine with two Thinkpads I tested with. That's why I didn't encounter this problem at all before resubmitting the corresponding patch set.
> If docks were found, then I suspect it could have been scribbling, but I > cannot actually check if that's true (for all I know, dock_station_count > may be always 1 bigger than the most that that double loop can discover); > but at least the loop is now made safe against scribbling.
It was actually working fine multiple times, out of pure luck it seems.
Regards, Holger
| |