On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:29:03PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > (Cc: Maxime, Thomas, Maarten) > > On Thu Jan 29, 2026 at 2:08 AM CET, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > That's what I've been advocating for. The best way to ensure that driver > > code will not accessed data freed at .remove() time is to prevent the > > code to run at all. > > With this we are in full agreement, I think that'd be best too. But, I also > think that sometimes this isn't possible. For instance, DRM has such a case > with > atomic mode setting.
I don't see why it would be impossible there. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
