Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:12:47 +0200 | From | Cornelia Huck <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism |
| |
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:58:45 -0400 (EDT), Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > > > The remove() method must also unset driver_data. > > > > > > It doesn't really have to. The driver core could do it. > > > > I think it is more consistent if the driver takes care of the fields > > specifically designed for its usage. > > Yes. However if the driver forgets to clear the field it shouldn't cause > a warning. After all, there won't be any harm; the next driver to bind > to the device will just overwrite the driver_data anyway.
Agreed, but it is still a good practice and should be recommended.
> > Yes. Especially since the "gone"-field may be contained in that > > embedding structure if the subsystem controls it. > > No, no! The "gone" flag must be in the private data structure. If it > were in a container of the device structure, then it could be overwritten > when a different driver binds to the device.
Argl, thinko again. You're right, of course. - 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/
| |