From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755198Ab3ETCNc (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 May 2013 22:13:32 -0400 Received: from intranet.asianux.com ([58.214.24.6]:18837 "EHLO intranet.asianux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755045Ab3ETCNb (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 May 2013 22:13:31 -0400 X-Spam-Score: -100.8 Message-ID: <51998699.4080202@asianux.com> Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 10:12:41 +0800 From: Chen Gang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Kroah-Hartman CC: Ming Lei , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Consult] Why need we call device_remove_file() firstly before call device_unregister() ? References: <5195C39F.9010101@asianux.com> <5199765F.5000905@asianux.com> <20130520014506.GA2201@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20130520014506.GA2201@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/20/2013 09:45 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:03:27AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: >> > On 05/18/2013 07:06 PM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> > > Hi, >>> > > >>> > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Chen Gang wrote: >>>> > >> Hello All: >>>> > >> >>>> > >> I searched 'arch/*' and 'drivers/*' sub-directory, all of them are 'obey >>>> > >> this rule', even in device_unregister() itself, it also firstly calls >>>> > >> device_remove_file(), then call kobject_del(). >>>> > >> >>>> > >> But after read the related code (fs/sysfs/*, drivers/base/core.c), it >>>> > >> seems kobject_del() -> sysfs_remove_dir() which will release all related >>>> > >> things (can instead of device_remove_file()). >>>> > >> >>>> > >> So in fact, we need not call device_remove_file() before call >>>> > >> device_unregister(), is it correct ? >>> > > >>> > > Looks it is correct but it is a bit implicit. >>> > > >> > >> > If really no other members reply within a week, we should treat your >> > opinion (or suggestion) as the final result conclusion within >> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org. :-) > I have no idea what you mean by this. > I mean that if no reply by any other members within a week, I will know it is correct that "we need not call device_remove_file() firstly before call device_unregister()" (at least, one member's reply supports this conclusion). I find this 'question' when discussing a patch with another members in linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, I have read the related code and also have searched with google, but can not find the result, so I want to consult it in linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org. And I think, this 'question' is not suitable to give a test firstly, because the test plan need be discussed firstly (or the test result means nothing). This time, I send the 'consult' mail to 'All', not to specific members. Thanks. -- Chen Gang Asianux Corporation