[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PH7PR11MB59584043A6EF64BC4C7291C89BA29@PH7PR11MB5958.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 06:37:37 +0000
From: <Tharunkumar.Pasumarthi@...rochip.com>
To: <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
<arnd@...db.de>, <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add
OTP/EEPROM driver for the pci1xxxx switch
> From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2023 1:33 PM
> To: Tharunkumar Pasumarthi - I67821
> <Tharunkumar.Pasumarthi@...rochip.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org; gregkh@...uxfoundation.org;
> arnd@...db.de; UNGLinuxDriver <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add
> OTP/EEPROM driver for the pci1xxxx switch
> > + unregister_blkdev(otp_block_driver_major, "OTPBlockDevice");
> > + auxiliary_driver_unregister(&pci1xxxx_otp_e2p_driver);
>
> I think it is harmless, but shouldn't it be done in the reverse order to match
> how resources have been allocated?
Hi Christophe,
Thanks for your comments.
In the earlier version of patch, auxiliary_driver_unregister was done before unregister_blkdev.
But Greg suggested to change it this way - "You need to unregister your block device _BEFORE_ the aux device goes away underneath it". Hence followed this order.
Thanks,
Tharun Kumar P
Powered by blists - more mailing lists