In message <20030506.072529.52888036.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> you write:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 09:08:20 -0700
>
> On Sat, 03 May 2003 14:07:41 +1000
> Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > But Alexey said you can only call unregister_netdev from module
> > unload, ie. if not a module, it can't be unloaded, hence no refcount
> > needed. I wrote the above paragraph because I'm not sure if I
> > understood Alexey correctly?
>
> There are several flavors of pseudo-network devices like bridging
> and VLAN that dynamically create/destroy netdev's even when they
> are not modules.
>
> I think you'll understand what Alexey/Rusty are saying better
> if you consider statically compiled kernel code as a module with
> an implicit non-zero reference count :-)
Yes, but his point is valid. We *do* want to destroy netdev's at
random times, not just from module cleanup code. Hotplug, for
example.
So me saying "just rely on the owner refcnt" was wrong.
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
|