[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120109181449.GF15083@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 10:14:49 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Michael Büsch <m@...s.ch>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Incorrect uses of get_driver()/put_driver()
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 12:35:09 -0500 (EST)
> Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> > drivers/ssb/main.c:146: get_driver(&drv->drv);
> > drivers/ssb/main.c:153: put_driver(&drv->drv);
> >
> > Michael, these are part of ssb_driver_get() and ssb_driver_put(), used
> > in ssb_devices_freeze() and ssb_devices_thaw(). They don't currently
> > do anything, but it looks as if they are meant to prevent the driver
> > from being unloaded. Should they be replaced with try_module_get()?
> > Or would it be good enough to call device_attach() in
> > ssb_devices_thaw()?
>
> Hm, It seems that this code is trying to pin the ssb_driver, so that
> it doesn't become invalid during the freeze period. So it most likely wants
> to protect against module unload and driver unbind here. Not sure
> if that actually works, though :/
>
Not at all ;)
--
Dmitry
--
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