On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 11:41:05 +0200 (CEST),
> Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hm, I don't think we should call device_release_driver if
> > > bus_attach_device failed (and I think calling bus_remove_device if
> > > bus_attach_device failed is unintuitive). I did a patch that added a
> > > function which undid just the things bus_add_device did (here:
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115816560424389&w=2),
> > > which unfortunately got lost somewhere... (I'll rebase and resend.)
> >
> > Yes, but it might be better to check dev->is_registered flag in
> > bus_remove_device() before device_release_driver() call to save some code,
> > rather than reuse most of code in bus_delete_device().
>
> If we undid things (symlinks et al.) in the order we added them, we can
> factor out bus_delete_device() from bus_remove_device() and avoid both
> code duplication and calling bus_remove_device() if bus_attach_device()
> failed. Something like the patch below (untested).
It looks better, but I think that having only one function with if
(is_registered) saves a few bytes of instruction memory. Anyway, I do not
feel myself to judge what's the best.
Jaroslav
-----
Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]>
Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer
ALSA Project, SUSE Labs
-
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]
