On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:43:49AM +1000, NeilBrown (neilb@suse.de) wrote:
> However lockdep didn't like it.  There are ordering problems between this
> mutex and and sysfs's s_active.
> 
> When you access battery properies via sysfs, the sysfs lock is taken first,
> then the master->mutex.
> When w1_reconnect_slaves calls through to device_del and sys_addrm_finish,
> the mutex is held while the sysfs lock is wanted.

I only came to idea of not allowing sysfs in ->probe() and instead
introduce new callback, which will initialize 'external' to w1 core
parts without holding master's mutex

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov