[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071130064113.GB14596@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:41:13 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Sample kset/ktype/kobject implementation
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 05:11:35PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > > > kobject_put(foo) is needed since it gets you through kobject_cleanup()
> > > > > where the name can be freed.
> > > >
> > > > No, kobject_register() should have handled that for us, right?
> > >
> > > kobject_register() doesn't do a kobject_put() if kobject_add() failed.
> >
> > Crap. If I can't get this code right in an example, the API is messed
> > up. Time to take Kay seriously and start to revamp the basic kobject
> > api :)
>
> The rule is simple enough. After calling kobject_register() you should
> always use kobject_put() -- even if kobject_register() failed.
Yes.
> In fact, after calling kobject_init() you should use kobject_put().
> The first rule follows from this one, since kobject_register() calls
> kobject_init() internally.
Yes, that makes sense, time to write it all down :)
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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