lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFD] alternative kobject release wait mechanism
Hello, Dmitry.

Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On 4/19/07, Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:13:43 -0400,
>> "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Because they are managed by 2 different entities. the struct device
>> > objects are managed by device core and driver-specific objects are
>> > managed by their respective driver.
>>
>> Not sure if I understand you here. My view of this was always that the
>> embedding object was kind of an extended device and that the relevant
>> driver/subsystem managed it through the driver core infrastructure.
>>
>
> I am not sure if I agree with this point of view. Driver (or
> subsystem) provides an instance of struct device for the rest of the
> system to iteract uniformly with (suspend/resume/tree
> visualization/etc) i.e. struct device implement an interface for
> subsystems. However most of the system use their own mechanisms to
> manage their devices. They can rely on the driver core to a certain
> degree but driver core is mostly a carries out helper functions, not
> the meat.

Many drivers (at least all the SCSI/IDE ones) consider struct device as
the base class of the devices those drivers implement. I don't think we
can just consider those drivers to be wrong.

--
tejun
-
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: 2007-04-20 08:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans