[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [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
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-30 22:23    [W:0.018 / U:168.504 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site