RFC: re-enable auto loading of floppy driver when the PNP info says there is a floppy

Hans de Goede hdegoede at redhat.com
Mon Apr 12 15:36:17 UTC 2010


I'm currently looking into fixing:

The easiest way to do this would be to remove the always modprobe floppy
code from anaconda and rely on udev for floppy driver loading.

But that cannot be done as for some reason the fedora kernel caries this
"beauty" of a patch called die-floppy-die.patch:


Kill the floppy.ko pnp modalias. We were surviving just fine without
autoloading floppy drivers, tyvm.

Please feel free to register all complaints in the wastepaper bin.

diff --git a/drivers/block/floppy.c b/drivers/block/floppy.c
index 91b7530..2ea84a6 100644
--- a/drivers/block/floppy.c
+++ b/drivers/block/floppy.c
@@ -4631,7 +4631,7 @@ static const struct pnp_device_id floppy_pnpids[] = {
         { "PNP0700", 0 },
         { }
-MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pnp, floppy_pnpids);
+/* MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pnp, floppy_pnpids); */



Which although it says "to register all complaints in the wastepaper bin",
I beg to differ. We can certainly do some kludge in anaconda to restore
the autoload behavior there, but I wonder why as many people seem to think
that the removal of the autoloading is a bad idea, see:

And also, this thread was which supposed to be about an anaconda specific
solution but turned into a why is floppy driver autoloading disabled thread:

So even though the auto loading may cause some issues (mostly for people
who have congfigured there is a floppy in the BIOS while there isn't one),
disabling it also causes issues, and we're deviating from upstream here.

So I wonder why are we deviating from upstream here, with a patch that clearly
has no intention of ever going upstream ? That seems to contradict most of
our policies.

And if those who are in favor of the patch believe it is a good patch, why
are they not taking this discussion upstream, and let it be fixed there ?



More information about the kernel mailing list