On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 03:59:56PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > There probably are situations where this doesn't matter.  But in general,
> > > don't you think the driver core should automatically remove all children
> > > below a device that has just lost its driver?  Or is it good enough to
> > > rely on all the individual drivers to make sure the problem can never
> > > arise?
> > 
> > The driver core shouldn't do anything special in this situation for
> > devices that have children. It doesn't now - think of PCI bridges (either
> > Host Bridges, or PCI-PCI Bridges). They have children but no drivers.
> > 
> > It is up to the ->remove() method in the driver to handle children. Note
> > that it can now safely remove them without deadlocking (because of the
> > klist patches), which was one impetus for proceeding with the development,
> > AFAIK.
> 
> Okay.  I'd still like to hear from Greg about the special cases involved 
> with USB hubs and root hubs.

I see that your patch takes care of this now, so there isn't anything
else to discuss :)

thanks,

greg "wait a day and everything resolves itself" k-h


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to