On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:12:49 -0400 (EDT),
Alan Stern <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm still not sure why bus_attach_device() was split off from
> bus_add_device() in the first place. Was it just so that the
> kobject_uevent() call could go in between?
I think yes. This was added in
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115092084915731&w=2
> This looks okay, but it would be better if bus_remove_device() did not
> directly call bus_delete_device(). Just add an extra call inside
> device_del(), so that everything remains symmetrical.
>
> While I'm harping on style issues, you should also capitalize AttachError
> so that it matches the form of the other statement labels nearby. And in
> bus_remove_device() you should put all the code inside the "if" block
> instead of returning when dev->bus isn't set, just as the neighboring
> subroutines do.
OK, new patch on the way.
--
Cornelia Huck
Linux for zSeries Developer
Tel.: +49-7031-16-4837, Mail: [email protected]
-
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]
