On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 09:58:15PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 03:06:15PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Ok, that's fine with me. Russell, any objections?
> >
> > None what so ever - that's mostly what I envisioned with the patch
> > with the _del method. However, I didn't have an existing user for it.
>
> Do you mean you have the code already? If it is so, could you please
> provide a patch Dmitry and I can give a try to?
No; I mean I _had_ the code, and it could probably be dug out, but
subsequent patch revisions removed it. It's probably archived in a
mail somewhere.
> If not, I am willing to give it a try, if you provide some guidance. I
> think I understand that platform_device_del would be the first half of
> platform_device_unregister, but do we then want to rebuild
> platform_device_unregister on top of platform_device_del so as to avoid
> code duplication, or not?
Yes on all counts.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
