Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 03:49:01 +0900,
Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Oh, one more thing, with proper code audit, we can just make
> device_unregister() do the waiting instead of adding separate
> device_unregister_wait().  I think that will be a good step toward
> immediate-detach driver model.

Do we really want that? If the release function doesn't sit in the
module, or if the device_unregister() is done for other reasons in a
non-module, we don't care about lingering references. There's no need
to wait (and possibly lock up) there.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
    • From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [Patch -mm 0/3] RFC: module unloading vs. release function
    • From: Cornelia Huck <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
    • From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
    • From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
• Next by Date: Re: Disabling x86 System Management Mode
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
• Next by thread: Re: [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]