| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070209003934.GA30794@kroah.com> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:39:34 -0800 From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> To: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: device_destroy On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 03:51:08PM +0000, James Simmons wrote: > > While porting over a few class_devices I discovered a problem with > device_destroy. It uses a dev_t which several classes don't use. > Should all classes require a dev_t or should we just pass in the device > itself? As you don't have a dev_t, then you have a handle to the 'struct device' itself, right? Then just call device_unregister(), that's all that device_destroy() does after it finds the device in the list of devices associated with the class. Does this help? thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists