On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 06:22:37PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> > And you
> > can't know that, so you have to call kobject_put() in order to be safe
> > and clean up everything.
> >
> > Now why did we not do the final kobject_put() in kobject_del() as well?
> > Doing two calls, always in order, seems a bit strange, anyone know why
> > it's this way?
>
> To be symmetrical with kobject_init() and kobject_add(). Besides,
> isn't there kobject_unregister()? Presumably it will go away along
> with kobject_register(), though.
Yes, it will go away too, once everyone gets converted.
> > > You could put that a little less strongly. After kobject_init() you
> > > SHOULD call kobject_put() to clean up properly, and after kobject_add()
> > > you MUST call kobject_del() and kobject_put().
> >
> > No, in looking at the code, you only need to call kobject_del() to clean
> > everything up properly, if kobject_add() succeeds. No need to call
> > kobject_put() yet again.
>
> Sorry, yes, that's what I meant. After a successful call to
> kobject_add() you must call kobject_del() to undo the _add, and then
> kobject_put() for the final cleanup.
No, kobject_del() does the put for you[1]. All that is needed is a call
to kobject_del().
I'll post the updated patches in a minute, they look and seem to work
much better.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
