From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Consult] Why need we call device_remove_file() firstly before call device_unregister() ?
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 10:42:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51998DA8.70609@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130520022016.GA2945@kroah.com>
On 05/20/2013 10:20 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:12:41AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> > 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.
> Asking random questions on lkml, and relying on the fact that no one
> else happens to say anything, is not any judge as to if the answer is
> correct at all.
>
OK, I can understand, now, thank you for your reply.
And I wish, we can provide the confirmation of all related questions
about Linux kernel, in the future,
> In fact, just asking questions on lkml has a very low chance of ever
> getting a correct answer, given that the people that usually do know the
> answer to these types of things are usually:
> 1) not reading lkml because they are busy doing real work
I should understand, they have no duty to have to reply the related
mail, especially every members already have their own work (and
normally, they are really busy).
> 2) annoyed by questions that are easily answered by themselves by
> either:
> a) reading the code
I have done, so I need not worry about this item. :-)
> b) writing a simple example module and testing it out yourself
>
Precisely, I did not do it firstly. It seems I should do it firstly
(although, at least now, I do not think it will get any valuable result
for our this case)
>
> Good luck,
>
OK, 'Lucky' is really the first important !!
I should continue to analyze this question, independent this 'consult' mail.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-20 2:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-17 5:43 [Consult] Why need we call device_remove_file() firstly before call device_unregister() ? Chen Gang
2013-05-18 11:06 ` Ming Lei
2013-05-20 1:03 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-20 1:45 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-05-20 2:12 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-20 2:20 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-05-20 2:42 ` Chen Gang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51998DA8.70609@asianux.com \
--to=gang.chen@asianux.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox