[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56788B27.20706@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:28:39 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Damien Riegel <damien.riegel@...oirfairelinux.com>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] watchdog: Create watchdog device in watchdog_dev.c
On 12/21/2015 09:31 AM, Damien Riegel wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 01:04:59PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> The watchdog character device is currently created in watchdog_dev.c,
>> and the watchdog device in watchdog_core.c. This results in
>> cross-dependencies, since device creation needs to know the watchdog
>> character device number as well as the watchdog class, both of which
>> reside in watchdog_dev.c.
>>
>> Create the watchdog device in watchdog_dev.c to simplify the code.
>>
>> Inspired by earlier patch set from Damien Riegel.
>
> Hi Guenter,
>
> The main purpose of my patch was to inverse the device creation and the
> cdev registration to avoid a racy situation, bu you have dropped that in
> this version. Is there a reason for that?
>
Every other driver I looked at does it in the same order (cdev first, device
second). I don't really know if doing it differently has any undesired
side effect, so I wanted to play safe.
It would help a lot if someone listening to this exchange can confirm
that it is ok to create the device first, followed by the character device.
Thanks,
Guenter
--
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