From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755100Ab0AFP1q (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:27:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753624Ab0AFP1l (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:27:41 -0500 Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:42254 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752862Ab0AFP1j (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:27:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:24 +0000 From: Matthew Garrett To: Larry Finger Cc: Carlos Corbacho , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Linux ACPI Subject: Re: Regression in module wmi since 2.6.32 (bisected to commit 1caab3c) Message-ID: <20100106152724.GA15664@srcf.ucam.org> References: <4B352513.90302@lwfinger.net> <200912252056.08436.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <4B353035.4050208@lwfinger.net> <200912252158.31127.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <4B353818.1020308@lwfinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B353818.1020308@lwfinger.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hm. I think this is an artifact of the way we're treating WMI right now. The assumption is that the interfaces are defined in namespace by their GUID, whereas in fact they're defined by their ACPI namespace. Can we avoid this by just setting the parent to the ACPI device's corresponding Linux device (if present) and including the WMI device's name in the dev_set_name call? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org