Removed a comment that was describing the relationship between the
visorchipset driver and the visorbus driver. Since they are now one
driver the comment no longer makes sense.
Signed-off-by: David Kershner <david.kersh...@unisys.com>
Reviewed-by: Reviewed-by: Tim Sell <timothy.s...@unisys.com>
---
drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c | 8 --------
1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
index bb1b6a0..b99adaa 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
@@ -1227,14 +1227,6 @@ initiate_chipset_device_pause_resume(struct visor_device
*dev, bool is_pause)
return;
}
- /*
- * Note that even though both drv->pause() and drv->resume
- * specify a callback function, it is NOT necessary for us to
- * increment our local module usage count. Reason is, there
- * is already a linkage dependency between child function
- * drivers and visorbus, so it is already IMPOSSIBLE to unload
- * visorbus while child function drivers are still running.
- */
if (is_pause) {
if (!drv->pause) {
(*notify_func)(dev, -EINVAL);
--
git-series 0.9.1
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
