Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 May 2004 16:39:14 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: class_device_find() |
| |
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 02:08:03AM +0400, Andrew Zabolotny wrote: > Ok, apart from this discussion, what you don't like about the > class_device_find() function? I mean your fixed implementation. The locks are > in place, the returned object has got his reference counter increased. Or, > alternatively, any other ideas how we can solve the problem I've described in > my previous message?
No in-kernel code uses it. That's my main objection. If a patch is submitted that needs it, I'll reconsider it based on that patch.
> Also one more question. Do you think if it is okay if a subclass (such > as the lcd device class) does strcpy() directly to class_device->class_id, or > it is worth to add a function class_dev_set_name(struct class_device *, const > char*)?
strncpy() is fine to do at this time.
thanks,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |