lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH] Device removal callback

> Instead I now do this, with the patch.
>
> void ieee1394_remove_node(struct device *dev)
> {
> list_for_each(..., &ne->device.children) {
> device_unregister(list_to_dev(lh));
> }
> }
>
> ...
> /* Where the dev is created */
> ...
> ne->device.remove = ieee1394_remove_node;
> device_register(&ne->device);
>
> Now, no matter where it's called from, doing...
>
> device_unregister(&ne->device);
>
> ...will make sure my remove callback is executed, so the children
> devices get unregistered aswell. I extend this to the host device
> and I have a recursive remocal scheme that is safe no matter where my
> devices get unregistered. Whole lot simpler that adding in a lot of
> failsafe's and checks.

But, you can do exactly the same with just a few added lines in the
ieee1394 core - just have a wrapper that calls ->remove() (in the 1394
device structure), then calls device_unregister() for the device.

Your ->remove() can do anything you like, including removing all the
children, much as I assume it does now. So, behavior is exactly as you
want, and it keeps it out of the core for now.

I much prefer this, as I would like to see it eventually, but I'd rather
see the implications worked out before it's generalized.

Thanks,


-pat

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.048 / U:8.724 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site