[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130815084221.3339142f@mitra.spranger.biz>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:42:21 +0200
From: Benedikt Spranger <b.spranger@...utronix.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Frank <Alexander.Frank@...rspaecher.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
"Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...sjkoch.de>,
Holger Dengler <dengler@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] uio: add module owner to prevent inappropriate
module unloading
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:33:11 -0700
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Step 4 should have told UIO that it was gone and had it shut everything
> down properly, so that there would not be a crash.
The MFD driver only knows about a specific MFD cell. Through
enable/disable callbacks the driver could tell UIO ...hm... whom? what?
Neither the MFD driver nor the MFD core knows something about a specific
UIO driver. But only that specific UIO driver knows about the device
node activities.
> > > You shouldn't need a module reference for this type of thing.
> > The driver uio_pdrv has no chance to recognize that the underlaying platform
> > device has gone.
> The mfd driver could tell it that it is gone, right?
It could tell, but whom and how?
Regards
Benedikt Spranger
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists