Re: [RFC] New system device API

From: Patrick Mochel (
Date: Mon Jun 09 2003 - 11:18:03 EST

> >-EXPORT_SYMBOL(device_lapic);
> Why did you ignore the 'not static' comment, and why remove
> the EXPORT? They're there for a reason...

Because it only appeared to be there to be able to set the parent device
for hierarchically dependent devices. Assuming that is not needed, then
the EXPORT_SYMBOL() shouldn't be needed, and that device can be declared
statically. Right?

> Unless I'm missing something, you've just broken the hierarchical
> relationship that exists between the local APIC device and its
> client devices (NMI watchdog, oprofile [which you didn't convert],
> and perfctr [not merged into Linus' tree]).

I'm aware of the necessary ancstral relationship, and I should have
mentioned this in the first email. Proper ancestral order is maintained by
virtue of the fact that child devices are registered after parent devices.
Because of this, they are inserted into the list of system devices after
their parents, so by walking the list in reverse order, you are guaranteed
to suspend/shutdown the devices in the right order.

Note that I ommitted this from the patch and will add it in by the time I
submit it to Linus.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:21 EST