Re: [Patch -mm 0/3] RFC: module unloading vs. release function

On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 07:36:19PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> based on the discussion in "How should an exit routine wait for
> release() callbacks?"

Wait, why is this needed anymore with the recent work in splitting sysfs
away from the backing code?

thanks,

greg k-h
-
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/

References:
- [Patch -mm 0/3] RFC: module unloading vs. release function
  - From: Cornelia Huck <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [patch -mm] i386: use pte_update_defer in ptep_test_and_clear_{dirty,young}
Next by Date: Re: [Patch -mm 0/3] RFC: module unloading vs. release function
Previous by thread: Re: [Patch -mm 0/3] RFC: module unloading vs. release function
Next by thread: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]