[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Incorrect uses of get_driver()/put_driver()
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012, Michael Büsch wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 14:48:15 -0500 (EST)
> Alan Stern <> wrote:
> > Maybe you want to call device_lock(&sdev->dev) here? It will prevent
> > the driver from being unbound (and therefore from being unloaded), and
> > it's likely that sdrv's remove and probe routines expect to be called
> > with this lock held, because that's what the device core does. The
> > drawback is that holding the lock prevents other things from happening
> > as well, like unregistering sdev.
> >
> > Alternatively, we can simply remove ssb_driver_get/put.
> I think in practice it doesn't matter. This function is only
> used in the rare case where the EEPROM on the board is written.

Okay, then we can just remove those calls and not worry about it for
now, right?

Alan Stern

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-09 23:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean