On 7 Mar 2005, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Seems that if kexec were to use remove() methods that'd > > probably resolve a lot of those issues. I confess I > > still don't see much point to a shutdown() method, unless > > maybe it's to avoid using reboot notifiers for that subset > > of remove() logic. > > I tend to agree, but I lost that argument. > > The primary argument was that in cases where the system had > oopsed or otherwise was not 100% stable. The remove() > method might not be stable. But a shutdown() method could > be. > > My observation has been that 9 times out of 10 nothing > really needs to be done. But it is clear there are exceptions > to that rule.
Shared IRQs will always be a problem. And the PCI subsystem doesn't implement shutdown() methods; that seems like a pretty big hole. I guess individual drivers can always create their own, however. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
