Ok, I'll do a v2 later this week with some of the feedback and tags?
On 21/02/17 11:18 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Logan Gunthorpe
> On 20/02/17 10:35 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> My only objection is to this statement. There is absolutely nothing that
>> prevents from calling device_unregister() first and cdev_del() later.
>> Refcounting will sort it all out.
> Yeah, I was really trying to warn people against calling cdev_del within
> the release function of the device. If you do that, then the cdev
> reference will block the device from ever getting released.
> Certainly, you could call device_unregister followed by cdev_del. I
> could reword this if you feel it necessary.
I agree with Dmitry, just delete the statement in parenthesis and the
rest is fine. If you're modifying this patch it might be good to take
the opportunity to add a WARN_ON(!parent->kobj.state_initialized) to
catch attempts to call device_add_cdev() with an uninitialized device.
You can also add:
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams(a)intel.com>