lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] kobject: add kobject_init_ng and kobject_init_and_add functions
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote:

> +/**
> + * kobject_init_and_add - initialize a kobject structure and add it to the kobject hierarchy
> + * @kobj: pointer to the kobject to initialize
> + * @ktype: pointer to the ktype for this kobject.
> + * @parent: pointer to the parent of this kobject.
> + * @fmt: the name of the kobject.
> + *
> + * This function will properly initialize a kobject and then call
> + * kobject_add().
> + *
> + * If the function returns an error, the memory allocated by the kobject
> + * can be safely freed, no other functions need to be called.
> + */
> +int kobject_init_and_add(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_type *ktype,
> + struct kobject *parent, const char *fmt, ...)
> +{
> + va_list args;
> + int retval;
> +
> + va_start(args, fmt);
> + retval = kobject_init_varg(kobj, ktype, parent, fmt, args);
> + va_end(args);
> + if (retval)
> + return retval;
> +
> + retval = kobject_add(kobj);
> + if (retval)
> + kobject_put(kobj);

No, no!

You have recreated the problem we have been discussing during the last
couple of days. If the kobject_init_varg() routine gets an error then
the kobject will need to be deallocated manually. If the kobject_add()
routine gets an error then the cleanup invoked by kobject_put() will do
the deallocation automatically.

But the caller can't tell in which subroutine an error occurred, so it
won't know what to do when kobject_init_and_add() returns an error.

The only way to resolve this problem is to have the _init routine
consume no resources and never fail. That way the only possible
failure mode would be if the _add routine doesn't work, in which case
either a kfree() or a kobject_put() would be acceptable.

In particular, this implies that the name should be set as part of the
_add() call, not as part of _init(). This is more in line with the way
the code tends to use kobjects anyhow. Unless people want to name
unregistered kobjects -- does this ever happen? And it if does, can
these kobjects simply be replaced by krefs?

My suggestion: Have kobject_init_ng() accept a ktype pointer but not a
parent or name. Instead, make kobject_add_ng() take the parent and
name (possibly a kset also). Then when kobject_init_and_add()
encounters an error, it shouldn't do a _put() -- the caller can either
do the _put() or just do a kfree().

Alan Stern

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-11-30 21:29    [W:0.051 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site