[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1206508069.24783.16.camel@lov.site>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 06:07:49 +0100
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
"Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fixing the main programmer thinko with the device model
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:16 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:57:32AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> writes:
> > >
> > > That's true, but irrelevant (and also soon to be untrue if we get rid of
> > > the scsi_device class as you and Kay keep requesting). The two calls
> > > release references on the actual embedded generic device, it's nothing
> > > to do with entangled lifetime rules.
> >
> > <heretic thought>Has anybody ever considered just doing away with
> > the problematic and bug prone and tricky reference counts for kobjects
> > and switch to a simple garbage collector for them?
>
> Sure, I have no objection to that. It's just that the reference count
> "issue" really doesn't seem to be one on sanely designed busses :)
Hmm, what is a "simple garbage collector" here? How could one determine
"reachability" of objects, means: at what point of time do objects
actually become "garbage"? How could one trace in our current kernel
code who still accesses an object, without doing refcounts?
Kay
--
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