RE: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed typo Intel RNG driver for2.6.21-rc7-mm1

RE: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed typo Intel RNG driver for2.6.21-rc7-mm1

[Tomita, Haruo]

> But why do you remove the printk()?

I think that FWH connected to LPC of ICHx are not only Intel products.
For example, sst... etc.
Does rng address differ in except Intel products? 
I think that this driver is targeting Intel FWH.
Therefore, printk() was removed.

# Do you think that a "FWH not detected" message is noisy?
--
Haruo

RE: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed typo Intel RNG driver for2.6.21-rc7-mm1

[Jan Beulich]

>>> "Tomita, Haruo" <haruo.tomita@toshiba.co.jp> 26.04.07 08:56 >>>
>> But why do you remove the printk()?
>
>I think that FWH connected to LPC of ICHx are not only Intel products.
>For example, sst... etc.
>Does rng address differ in except Intel products? 

I am not aware of non-Intel FWHs supporting the same RNG interface.

>I think that this driver is targeting Intel FWH.
>Therefore, printk() was removed.

If you're worried about people thinking their box being reported to have no
FWH when it does, then just make the message say so (i.e. add 82802 or
alike).

># Do you think that a "FWH not detected" message is noisy?

No, I think it helps understanding why there's no RNG device in the system.

Jan

RE: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed typo Intel RNG driver for2.6.21-rc7-mm1

[Tomita, Haruo]

Hi Jan,

Thank you for the comment.
 
> ># Do you think that a "FWH not detected" message is noisy?
> 
> No, I think it helps understanding why there's no RNG device 
> in the system.

OK, the typo fixes patch was corrected.

 intel-rng.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- linux-2.6.21-rc7-mm1/drivers/char/hw_random/intel-rng.c~	2007-04-26 13:41:53.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc7-mm1/drivers/char/hw_random/intel-rng.c	2007-04-26 16:26:16.000000000 +0900
@@ -365,7 +365,8 @@ static int __init mod_init(void)
 	pci_dev_put(dev);
 	iounmap(intel_rng_hw->mem);
 	kfree(intel_rng_hw);
-	goto out;
+	if (err)
+		goto out;
 
 fwh_done:
 	err = -ENOMEM;