[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160609212228.GR23522@katana>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:22:28 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
Robin Gong <b38343@...escale.com>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework
> > >> * moved sysfs device attributes to watchdog_dev.c, this required to
> > >> add exported watchdog_pretimeout_governor_name() interface
> > >
> > > Why this move? Before, all the pretimeout stuff was nicely encapsulated
> > > in its own file which could be compiled out. Now things are mixing. What
> > > was wrong with the approach I took?`
> >
> > Simplification of the "struct device" life time management?
> > A lot of time and efforts were spent to centralize it, while you know
> > that I took both approaches, I tend to keep it exclusively in
> > watchdog_dev.c , probably Guenter can express his point of view.
> >
>
> Yes, I am very much concerned that I'll have to go back and look into
> all the lifetime issues again which we just managed to resolve.
> Not looking forward to it :-(.
I will have a look at it again, too... but I still wonder if this is an
issue if the whole pretimeout governor framework is spawned from
watchdog_dev.c. And I understand things can be subtle here.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists