Re: [PATCH] drivers/base/driver.c : driver_unregister

[Arne Caspari]

Arne Caspari wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
> > No.  The semaphore is there to ensure that the function does not
> > return until the driver structure has a use count of zero.  If you
> > tested your patch, you'd find that your change would deadlock on
> > the locked semaphore.
>
> I am sorry I can not test that patch since unloading of the modules I am 
> currently testing blocks anyway. This makes it very hard to test the 
> patch :-( and currently this was the reason why I was going to this.

I reverted the code to the original 2.6.9 and unloading of IEEE1394 
modules like 'eth1394' does just that: It deadlocks on this semaphore.

At least this is a good excuse why I was not able to test my patch ;-) 
The behaviour just remained the same as before...

Btw. I am developing/debugging on a machine without serial/parallel 
ports. Is there a way to connect a kernel mode debugger to this. I am 
used to windows development and there the debugger works on a IEEE1394 
connection. Does anybody have hints to improve development on such a 
machine?


Thanks,

	/Arne

-
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/