Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Nov 2007 16:19:53 -0500 (EST) | From | Alan Stern <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] kobject: add kobject_init_ng and kobject_init_and_add functions |
| |
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> > 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(). > > Why not the parent for init()? Isn't it always known at that time? > I'll dig to be sure.
Specifying the parent during _add() is more logical, because a kobject doesn't actually _do_ anything to the parent until it is registered in the parent's directory. Or to put it another way, an unregistered kobject can't have a parent in any meaningful sense so there's no point specifying the parent in the _init() call.
It's really just a matter of taste.
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/
| |