Re: [PATCH] Take 2: cdev_unmap()

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 11:01:03AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> I didn't get any responses to my last posting on cdev_unmap(); I take it
> that means nobody objects :)
> 
> To recap my argument: the current cdev implementation keeps an uncounted
> reference to every cdev in cdev_map.  Creators of cdevs must know to call
> cdev_unmap() with the same arguments they passed to cdev_add() before
> releasing the device, or that reference will remain and will oops the
> kernel should user space attempt to open the (missing) device.  It's an
> easy mistake to make, and, IMO, entirely unnecessary; the cdev code should
> be able to do its own bookkeeping.
> 
> So, does anybody have a reason why this shouldn't go in?  Al, have I missed
> something?

I sure like it, it starts to make the cdev interface easier to use.  

Al, unless you object, I'll add this to my driver bk tree which will get
sucked into -mm and then send it off to Linus after a bit of testing.

thanks,

greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/