On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, Stefan Richter wrote:
> On 20 Nov, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> > Is the problem caused by the fact that some of these struct device's
> >> > aren't bound to a driver? Remember, bus_rescan_devices() will skip over
> >> > anything that already has a driver. Could you solve your problem by
> >> > adding a do_nothing driver that would bind to these otherwise unused
> >> > devices?
>
> There are three minor problems with this approach:
> - some ballast in system memory for the dummy driver struct
> - the dummy driver is visible in sysfs
> - the (root) user can unbind the driver which will recreate the
> preconditions for the deadlock
I agree with all these objections.
The real issue here is the way ieee1394 sets up children of devices with
no driver. On the face of it that is quite illogical: If a device has no
driver, then who can interrogate it to find out about its children?
USB faces a similar situation. In a USB device, all the real work is
actually done by "interfaces". So we set up a device structure for the
USB device itself, plus device structures for each of its interfaces. The
parent structure is bound to a (more or less) dummy driver, which insures
that the child structures are deleted whenever it gets unbound.
Still, maybe some compromise can be reached. Perhaps Dmitry's idea, or
something like it, can be adopted.
Alan Stern
-
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]
