Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: Clarifying platform_device_unregister | From | Richard Purdie <> | Date | Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:07:33 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 21:57 -0400, Jaya Kumar wrote: > I also have a followup. Does corgi/spitz_pm need to manage the module > refcount of sharpsl-pm? I couldn't find any platform device code that > manages the refcount of the platform driver that it binds them to. So > I suspect this means that platform devices must do the try_module_get > stuff themselves. Out of curiosity, what's the reason for not doing > this inside the base/platform.c code?
I don't think any refcount is needed since corgi/spitz_pm refer to functions in sharpsl-pm and therefore sharpsl-pm will always be around as long as corgi/spitz_pm is.
Regards,
Richard
|  |