From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933358AbXCMVIb (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:08:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933365AbXCMVIb (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:08:31 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]:3026 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933358AbXCMVIa (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:08:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ornZkbw6fSreiTgnWdiJFF5+csYDo9GUX0zXKYTdBVT+z5yNmSyIzXHhNhmHJEKFd/OsYh5S6ikT/SMmDR4ktWx7dSGLgJX9Xcy9uPA687K2Bp07W02eTaNz0jv223WfCVTzDQoh3d54sxg0319KSZvxdw7CCHj/rXD2wX1buck= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:08:27 -0400 From: "Dmitry Torokhov" To: "Hugh Dickins" Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc suspend regression: sysfs deadlock Cc: "Alan Stern" , "Oliver Neukum" , "Maneesh Soni" , gregkh@suse.de, "Richard Purdie" , "James Bottomley" , "Linus Torvalds" , "Kernel development list" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/13/07, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > On the other hand, a quick survey of the kernel source shows that > > DEVICE_ATTR is used over 1500 times. Auditing all of them is not a job > > for the faint-of-heart! > > Indeed, and faint-hearted Hugh wasn't intending to do so: but > stout-hearted Alan will need to, won't he, before his patch can go in? > I think we could rely on subsystems maintainers to let us know if there are potential problems. For example I can tell that neither input, serio nor gameport subsystems use sysfs to destroy their devices (action on sysfs may cause some other device to be destroyed but that should be ok, only self-destruction is not allowed, right?) -- Dmitry