From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kobject: add kobject_init_ng and kobject_init_and_add functions
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:48:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071130214819.GA7326@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0711301616300.2941-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 04:19:53PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > My suggestion: Have kobject_init_ng() accept a ktype pointer but not a
> > > parent or name. Instead, make kobject_add_ng() take the parent and
> > > name (possibly a kset also). Then when kobject_init_and_add()
> > > encounters an error, it shouldn't do a _put() -- the caller can either
> > > do the _put() or just do a kfree().
> >
> > Why not the parent for init()? Isn't it always known at that time?
> > I'll dig to be sure.
>
> Specifying the parent during _add() is more logical, because a kobject
> doesn't actually _do_ anything to the parent until it is registered in
> the parent's directory. Or to put it another way, an unregistered
> kobject can't have a parent in any meaningful sense so there's no point
> specifying the parent in the _init() call.
Ok, how about this:
void kobject_init(struct kobject *kobj, struct ktype *ktype);
and then:
int kobject_add(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobject *parent, const char *fmt, ...);
After we call kobject_init() we HAVE to call kobject_put() to clean up
properly. So, if kobject_add() fails, we still need to clean up with
kobject_put();
That means we _can_ create a:
int kobject_init_and_add(struct kobject *kobj, struct ktype *ktype, struct kobject *parent, const char *fmt, ...);
and if that fails, then again, you have to call kobject_put() to clean
things up, right?
Does this look sane?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-30 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-30 19:51 [RFC] kobject_init changes Greg KH
2007-11-30 19:53 ` [RFC] kobject: add kobject_init_ng and kobject_init_and_add functions Greg KH
2007-11-30 19:54 ` [RFC] kobject: convert some users of kobject_init to the new functions Greg KH
2007-11-30 20:25 ` [RFC] kobject: add kobject_init_ng and kobject_init_and_add functions Alan Stern
2007-11-30 21:04 ` Greg KH
2007-11-30 21:07 ` Greg KH
2007-11-30 21:19 ` Alan Stern
2007-11-30 21:48 ` Greg KH [this message]
2007-11-30 22:10 ` Alan Stern
2007-11-30 22:26 ` Greg KH
2007-11-30 23:22 ` Alan Stern
2007-12-01 0:58 ` Greg KH
2007-11-30 22:33 ` Greg KH
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071130214819.GA7326@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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).