From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933631Ab0EYSSl (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2010 14:18:41 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:44419 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933489Ab0EYSRi (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2010 14:17:38 -0400 X-Mailbox-Line: From gregkh@clark.site Tue May 25 11:12:14 2010 Message-Id: <20100525181214.231161745@clark.site> User-Agent: quilt/0.48-8.10 Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 11:09:20 -0700 From: Greg KH To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Cc: stable-review@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Jean Delvare Subject: [22/25] hwmon: (w83781d) Request I/O ports individually for probing In-Reply-To: <20100525181259.GA18630@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2.6.27-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ From: Jean Delvare commit b0bcdd3cd0adb85a7686b396ba50493871b1135c upstream. Different motherboards have different PNP declarations for W83781D/W83782D chips. Some declare the whole range of I/O ports (8 ports), some declare only the useful ports (2 ports at offset 5) and some declare fancy ranges, for example 4 ports at offset 4. To properly handle all cases, request all ports individually for probing. After we have determined that we really have a W83781D or W83782D chip, the useful port range will be requested again, as a single block. I did not see a board which needs this yet, but I know of one for lm78 driver and I'd like to keep the logic of these two drivers in sync. Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/hwmon/w83781d.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/hwmon/w83781d.c +++ b/drivers/hwmon/w83781d.c @@ -1797,17 +1797,17 @@ static int __init w83781d_isa_found(unsigned short address) { int val, save, found = 0; + int port; - /* We have to request the region in two parts because some - boards declare base+4 to base+7 as a PNP device */ - if (!request_region(address, 4, "w83781d")) { - pr_debug("w83781d: Failed to request low part of region\n"); - return 0; - } - if (!request_region(address + 4, 4, "w83781d")) { - pr_debug("w83781d: Failed to request high part of region\n"); - release_region(address, 4); - return 0; + /* Some boards declare base+0 to base+7 as a PNP device, some base+4 + * to base+7 and some base+5 to base+6. So we better request each port + * individually for the probing phase. */ + for (port = address; port < address + W83781D_EXTENT; port++) { + if (!request_region(port, 1, "w83781d")) { + pr_debug("w83781d: Failed to request port 0x%x\n", + port); + goto release; + } } #define REALLY_SLOW_IO @@ -1881,8 +1881,8 @@ w83781d_isa_found(unsigned short address val == 0x30 ? "W83782D" : "W83781D", (int)address); release: - release_region(address + 4, 4); - release_region(address, 4); + for (port--; port >= address; port--) + release_region(port, 1); return found; }