On 05/03/17 12:57, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
> wrote:
>
>> Even if bus is not hot-pluggable, devices can be unbound from the
>> driver via sysfs, so we should not be using __exit annotations on
>> remove() methods. The only exception is drivers regist
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
wrote:
> Even if bus is not hot-pluggable, devices can be unbound from the
> driver via sysfs, so we should not be using __exit annotations on
> remove() methods. The only exception is drivers registered with
> platform_driver_probe() which specifi
On 01/03/17 23:37, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Even if bus is not hot-pluggable, devices can be unbound from the
> driver via sysfs, so we should not be using __exit annotations on
> remove() methods. The only exception is drivers registered with
> platform_driver_probe() which specifically disables s
Even if bus is not hot-pluggable, devices can be unbound from the
driver via sysfs, so we should not be using __exit annotations on
remove() methods. The only exception is drivers registered with
platform_driver_probe() which specifically disables sysfs bind/unbind
attributes.
Signed-off-by: Dmitr
4 matches
Mail list logo