![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:16 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:57:32AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> writes: > > > > > > That's true, but irrelevant (and also soon to be untrue if we get rid of > > > the scsi_device class as you and Kay keep requesting). The two calls > > > release references on the actual embedded generic device, it's nothing > > > to do with entangled lifetime rules. > > > > <heretic thought>Has anybody ever considered just doing away with > > the problematic and bug prone and tricky reference counts for kobjects > > and switch to a simple garbage collector for them? > > Sure, I have no objection to that. It's just that the reference count > "issue" really doesn't seem to be one on sanely designed busses :) Hmm, what is a "simple garbage collector" here? How could one determine "reachability" of objects, means: at what point of time do objects actually become "garbage"? How could one trace in our current kernel code who still accesses an object, without doing refcounts? Kay -- 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: 2008-03-26 06:11 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||