[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:0.051 / U:1.900 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site