linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/8] staging: vme: add functions for bridge module refcounting

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 3 Aug 2011 11:23:17 -0400
From:	"Emilio G. Cota" <cota@...ap.org>
To:	Manohar Vanga <manohar.vanga@...n.ch>
Cc:	Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...com>, gregkh@...e.de,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] staging: vme: add functions for bridge module
 refcounting

On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 16:06:30 +0200, Manohar Vanga wrote:
> Hey Martyn,
> 
> > Can we not do this inside vme_master_request, vme_slave_request, etc?
> > 
> > I.e. Add reference count when resources are given out.
> > 
> > This would then be done in the vme_*_free routines.
> 
> I agree this would be much better. I will change this and resend :)

To me it seems better to keep this as is, to be
used by .probe and .release methods, in the same way
usb_get_dev() and usb_put_dev() are used by usb drivers.

Hiding refcounts under the resource accessors will just
complicate things unnecessarily. Modifying refcounts
should always be explicit unless there's a very good
reason against it.

		Emilio 
--
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/