[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877guc4ryk.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:09:23 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@...il.com>,
Lior Dotan <liodot@...il.com>,
Christopher Harrer <charrer@...critech.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging/slicoss: disable pci device at remove
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:04:19PM +0530, Devendra Naga wrote:
>> at probe we enabled the device, and we should disable it at remove.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@...il.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/staging/slicoss/slicoss.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/slicoss/slicoss.c b/drivers/staging/slicoss/slicoss.c
>> index a511a2b..5bd3825 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/slicoss/slicoss.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/slicoss/slicoss.c
>> @@ -3234,6 +3234,7 @@ static void __devexit slic_entry_remove(struct pci_dev *pcidev)
>> }
>> free_netdev(dev);
>> pci_release_regions(pcidev);
>> + pci_disable_device(pcidev);
>
> No, you really shouldn't do this, see the many times this has come up on
> the linux-kernel mailing list for why.
I haven't see this? Why don't you want to disable a device at remove
time? Because we put the disable in the generic pci layer?
Eric
--
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