Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:06:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:06:55 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:12559 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:06:37 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:14:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Patrick Mochel cc: Alexander Viro , Subject: Re: [bk/patch] driver model update: device_unregister() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1004 Lines: 26 On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Patrick Mochel wrote: > > No problem; I'll do that today. But, I also think some of the stuff in > fs/partitions/check.c is bogus and should die. Partitions are not devices, > and shouldn't be treated as such. I think that is a valid argument as long as it's called "driverfs" or something, but since the thing is clearly evolving into a "kernelfs" and has drivers and devices as only a part of its structure knowledge, and is used to expose various kernel hierarchies and relationships, I actually think that it makes sense to expose the relationship of partitions to devices. (Not that it has to use "struct device" to do so, of course, although I don't see any major reason why it couldn't..) What's the oops due to? Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/