archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Hubbard <>
To: Greg KH <>
Cc: Minchan Kim <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	linux-mm <>,
	LKML <>, <>,
	<>, <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: cma: support sysfs
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 22:34:51 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 2/8/21 10:27 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 2/8/21 10:13 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 05:57:17PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> On 2/8/21 3:36 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>>>         char name[CMA_MAX_NAME];
>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CMA_SYSFS
>>>>>> +    struct cma_stat    *stat;
>>>>> This should not be a pointer. By making it a pointer, you've added a bunch of pointless
>>>>> extra code to the implementation.
>>>> Originally, I went with the object lifetime with struct cma as you
>>>> suggested to make code simple. However, Greg KH wanted to have
>>>> release for kobj_type since it is consistent with other kboject
>>>> handling.
>>> Are you talking about the kobj in your new struct cma_stat? That seems
>>> like circular logic if so. I'm guessing Greg just wanted kobj methods
>>> to be used *if* you are dealing with kobjects. That's a narrower point.
>>> I can't imagine that he would have insisted on having additional
>>> allocations just so that kobj freeing methods could be used. :)
>> Um, yes, I was :)
>> You can not add a kobject to a structure and then somehow think you can
>> just ignore the reference counting issues involved.  If a kobject is
>> part of a structure then the kobject is responsible for controling the
>> lifespan of the memory, nothing else can be.
>> So by making the kobject dynamic, you properly handle that memory
>> lifespan of the object, instead of having to worry about the lifespan of
>> the larger object (which the original patch was not doing.)
>> Does that make sense?
> That part makes sense, yes, thanks. The part that I'm trying to straighten
> out is, why was kobject even added to the struct cma_stat in the first
> place? Why not just leave .stat as a static member variable, without
> a kobject in it, and done?

Sorry, I think I get it now: this is in order to allow a separate lifetime
for the .stat member. I was sort of implicitly assuming that the "right"
way to do it is just have the whole object use one lifetime management,
but as you say, there is no kobject being added to the parent.

I still feel odd about the allocation and freeing of something that seems
to be logically the same lifetime (other than perhaps a few, briefly pending
sysfs reads, at the end of life). So I'd still think that the kobject should
be added to the parent...

John Hubbard

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-09  6:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-08 18:01 [PATCH v2] mm: cma: support sysfs Minchan Kim
2021-02-08 21:34 ` John Hubbard
2021-02-08 23:36   ` Minchan Kim
2021-02-09  1:57     ` John Hubbard
2021-02-09  4:19       ` Minchan Kim
2021-02-09  5:18         ` John Hubbard
2021-02-09  5:27           ` John Hubbard
2021-02-09  6:13       ` Greg KH
2021-02-09  6:27         ` John Hubbard
2021-02-09  6:34           ` John Hubbard [this message]
2021-02-09  6:56             ` Greg KH
2021-02-09 15:55               ` Minchan Kim
2021-02-09 17:49                 ` Greg KH
2021-02-09 20:11                   ` John Hubbard
2021-02-09 21:13                     ` Minchan Kim
2021-02-10  6:43                       ` Greg KH
2021-02-10  7:12                         ` Minchan Kim
2021-02-10  7:16                           ` John Hubbard
2021-02-10  7:26                             ` Greg KH
2021-02-10  7:50                               ` John Hubbard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).