vesafb probe question

I'm getting a message in dmesg:  "localhost kernel: vesafb: probe of
vesafb0 failed with error -6"

I searched the web, and found that a lot of people are getting this, but
I couldn't find an answer, so I looked into it.

This appears to be because "vesafb" returns -ENXIO ("No such device or
address") when its probe function fails.  However, driverse/base/bus.c
spews an error message during device_attach() if a matching driver's
probe function returns anything but -ENODEV ("No such device").

Would a patch (like the one below) to change vesafb to return ENODEV
instead of ENXIO be appropriate, or am I missing something?

Thanks!
Stuart
stuart_hayes@dell.com



diff -purN linux-2.6.9-1.906_ELorig/drivers/video/vesafb.c
linux-2.6.9-1.906_EL/drivers/video/vesafb.c

--- linux-2.6.9-1.906_ELorig/drivers/video/vesafb.c	2004-10-18

17:53:11.000000000 -0400

+++ linux-2.6.9-1.906_EL/drivers/video/vesafb.c	2005-01-06

14:45:18.000000000 -0500

@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ static int __init vesafb_probe(struct de
 	int i, err;
 
 	if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_VLFB)
-		return -ENXIO;
+		return -ENODEV;
 
 	vesafb_fix.smem_start = screen_info.lfb_base;
 	vesafb_defined.bits_per_pixel = screen_info.lfb_depth;

@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ static int __init vesafb_probe(struct de
 		(ypan) ? FBINFO_HWACCEL_YPAN : 0;
 
 	if (fb_alloc_cmap(&info->cmap, 256, 0) < 0) {
-		err = -ENXIO;
+		err = -ENODEV;
 		goto err;
 	}
 	if (register_framebuffer(info)<0) {

On Saturday 08 January 2005 05:03, Stuart_Hayes@Dell.com wrote:

I'm getting a message in dmesg:  "localhost kernel: vesafb: probe of
vesafb0 failed with error -6"

I searched the web, and found that a lot of people are getting this, but
I couldn't find an answer, so I looked into it.

This appears to be because "vesafb" returns -ENXIO ("No such device or
address") when its probe function fails.  However, driverse/base/bus.c
spews an error message during device_attach() if a matching driver's
probe function returns anything but -ENODEV ("No such device").

Would a patch (like the one below) to change vesafb to return ENODEV
instead of ENXIO be appropriate, or am I missing something?

-ENODEV is fine.

Tony




-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt