[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47025EB2.6010606@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 11:07:30 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@...el.com>
CC: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] ata: libata: add per device private data
Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> Allow host controllers to store private data per device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@...el.com>
>
> ---
> include/linux/libata.h | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> Index: libata-dev/include/linux/libata.h
> ===================================================================
> --- libata-dev.orig/include/linux/libata.h 2007-09-24 16:13:33.000000000 -0700
> +++ libata-dev/include/linux/libata.h 2007-09-24 16:15:24.000000000 -0700
> @@ -474,6 +474,9 @@ struct ata_device {
> /* error history */
> struct ata_ering ering;
> int spdn_cnt;
> +
> + /* controller driver per device private data */
> + void *private_data;
I don't have any objections to this per se... a lot of other subsystems
do this too, and I can certainly see a potential need.
But what about object lifetimes? If a controller is hot-unplugged, does
anyone need notification to destroy dynamic objects, or does controller
cleanup take care of that? If a device is unplugged, where should a
controller driver do its ->private_data cleanup?
This is /not/ a NAK, just a request to make clear the lifetime rules and
procedures...
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists