On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm still not sure why bus_attach_device() was split off from > bus_add_device() in the first place. Was it just so that the > kobject_uevent() call could go in between? I think yes. This was added in http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115092084915731&w=2 > This looks okay, but it would be better if bus_remove_device() did not > directly call bus_delete_device(). Just add an extra call inside > device_del(), so that everything remains symmetrical. > > While I'm harping on style issues, you should also capitalize AttachError > so that it matches the form of the other statement labels nearby. And in > bus_remove_device() you should put all the code inside the "if" block > instead of returning when dev->bus isn't set, just as the neighboring > subroutines do. OK, new patch on the way. -- Cornelia Huck Linux for zSeries Developer Tel.: +49-7031-16-4837, Mail: cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
