In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Smith writes:
>> In message <Pine.BSF.4.20.0005141328380.78621-100000@localhost>, Nick Hibma wri
>> >Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you actually have to
>> >disassociate any dev_t's from the driver (by clearing the si_drv
>> >fields) because we call destroy_dev and cdevsw_remove, so any later uses
>> >of dev_t's get an error because the device has gone away.
>> destroy_dev will clear the necessary fields in a dev_t, cdevsw_remove
>> will not.
>Is it correct to assume that destroy_dev() still isn't working correctly?
>(disk_destroy certainly isn't).
disk_destroy is different from destroy_dev, and I'll get to it real soon.
>Also, while you still can, that should be dev_destroy().
No, because the corresponding is called make_dev().
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message