On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:53:57PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> wrote:
> > Hi Ming,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:01:48PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> module reference doesn't cover direct loading path, so this patch
> >> simply hol
Hi Dmitry,
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
wrote:
> Hi Ming,
>
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:01:48PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> module reference doesn't cover direct loading path, so this patch
>> simply holds the module in the whole life time of request_firmware()
>> to fix the pro
Hi Ming,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:01:48PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> module reference doesn't cover direct loading path, so this patch
> simply holds the module in the whole life time of request_firmware()
> to fix the problem.
This does not make sense to me. If request_firmware() is executing th
module reference doesn't cover direct loading path, so this patch
simply holds the module in the whole life time of request_firmware()
to fix the problem.
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei
---
drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a
4 matches
Mail list logo