| 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: <20130412215125.GA16042@kroah.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:51:25 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] base/core.c: improve comment of the function device_find_child() On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:59:32PM +0200, Federico Vaga wrote: > Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...il.com> > --- > drivers/base/core.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c > index 016312437..eb0c6ea 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/core.c > +++ b/drivers/base/core.c > @@ -1372,6 +1372,10 @@ int device_for_each_child(struct device *parent, void *data, > * if it does. If the callback returns non-zero and a reference to the > * current device can be obtained, this function will return to the caller > * and not iterate over any more devices. > + * > + * NOTE: internally, the function does get_device() on the retrieved child. > + * It is duty of the caller performing a put_device() on the retrieved > + * child device when the caller finishes to work on it. > */ Why not just use the same wording that class_find_device() has, which is simpler and easier to understand (IMHO)? 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