On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 11:19:30AM +0200, Michael Hunold wrote:
> The code does not behave differently. If DVB_DEVFS_ONLY is set, then the
> old chardev register interface is omitted.
Which is a different behaviour, now you can't create a device node
manually anymor. Also note that the feature you rely on here (devfs
presetting file->private_data) will go away in the next round of patches,
see Al Viro's patchit for a generic replacement that works with or
without devfs.
> > Just removing this makes the code even more incorrect. You need to
> > add a ->owner member and call try_module_get on it before calling into
> > the module (and handle the return value..)
>
> There is a functional dependency between the dvb-core and the actual dvb
> driver. So there is no need to increase the module count of the dvb-core
> if a new adapter is registered IMHO, because you cannot unload the
> dvb-core before the driver anyway.
Okay, you're right I should have read more of the code to get the global
picture. You still wan't an owner field for at least struct dvb_device
device, though - but the try_module_get must go into dvb_generic_open
and maybe in more other places where you use the "backend" modules.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 07 2003 - 22:00:30 EST