From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Don Fry Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2][ATM]: Do not free already unregistered net device. Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 09:44:40 -0700 Message-ID: <1210005880.5716.4.camel@Linux.home> Reply-To: davem@davemloft.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from vms040pub.verizon.net ([206.46.252.40]:43981 "EHLO vms040pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755354AbYEEQpZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2008 12:45:25 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([72.90.101.98]) by vms040.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K0E0014YMQ6R0D2@vms040.mailsrvcs.net> for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:49:18 -0500 (CDT) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I do not understand why this change was accepted. All of the network drivers I just looked at in 2.6.25 do unregister_netdev() followed sometime soon by free_netdev(). Is there something different about ATM devices? I did not look at all the drivers. Don