On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:05:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 03:21:28PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:30:03PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > I don't think I like these at all. remove_one has always been buggy in > > > that it removes everything. We should fix it to only remove one instead > > > of formalizing the currect terrible behavior. > > Its already applied. > > I thought after the full series the code became a little better than the > > original one. > > It looks nicer but it's wrong. > > > > Now dgap_stop() is being called from dgap_remove_one(). How do you suggest > > it should be? > > dgap_remove_one() should mirror dgap_init_one(). dgap_stop() should > only be called from dgap_cleanup_module(). dgap_cleanup_module() should > mirror dgap_init_module(). But if dgap_stop() is only called from dgap_cleanup_module() then what will happen if the pci device is suddenly removed? Currently if the pci device is removed then the remove callback will be executed and it will stop and unregister everything properly. regards sudip _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
