Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>On 3/22/06, Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 02:45:01PM -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ok, one more try. Russell, I assume you mean to use
>>>platform_device_alloc(), which seems to do what you suggested.
>>>And I assume the driver_data is the way to store whatever you
>>>need, instead of using the container_of() macro.
>>>
>>>Arjun, Russell, thanks for the info.
>>>
>>>Now the patch...
>>>
>>>Arjun van de Ven pointed out that the changeover to the driver model
>>>in the IPMI driver had some bugs in it dealing with the release
>>>function and cleanup. Then Russell King pointed out that you can't
>>>put release functions in the same module as the unregistering code.
>>>
>>>
>>Yes you can, you just have to properly set up the module attribute
>>owners and it will work just fine.
>>
>>
>>
>
>No, not really. You can only do that if _all_ sysfs attributes for the
>object are handled in your driver which is rarely the case (dev,
>/power/* attributes, etc).
>
>
I don't see an owner field in the device structure. So you are
saying that if the same module owns the device_driver structure,
it is safe, but if not it is not safe.
-Corey
-
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]
