Re: [PATCH 7/7] [RFC] APM emulation driver for class batteries

[Russell King]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 01:08:29AM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 09:24:21PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > Utterly unsafe.  What happens if some other module gets loaded which
> > does this, and then this module is unloaded followed by the other
> > module.  Result: Oops.
> 
> Right. And loading two modules which changing apm_get_power_status
> is a race already. Thus, APM interface needs a mutex.
> 
> Or pda_power should be marked "bool" in Kconfig, as it is done
> in arch/arm/common/sharpsl_pm.c. Sharpsl_pm is safe only because it
> can't be a module.
> 
> Personally I'd keep things as is for now (i.e. I'd want tristate for
> PDA_POWER, not bool). Later APM API can be fixed.

Experience shows "Later" more often than not means "never", inspite
of what is said at the time the word is used...

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/