[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] sysfs representation of stacked devices (common) (rev.2)
- From: Greg KH <gregkh suse de>
- To: "Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura ce jp nec com>
- Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb suse de>, Alasdair Kergon <agk redhat com>, linux-kernel vger kernel org
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] sysfs representation of stacked devices (common) (rev.2)
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:48:53 -0800
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:13:00AM -0500, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote:
> +/* This is a mere directory in sysfs. No methods are needed. */
> +static struct kobj_type bd_holder_ktype = {
> + .release = NULL,
> + .sysfs_ops = NULL,
> + .default_attrs = NULL,
> +};
That doesn't look right. You always need a release function.
> +static inline void add_holder_dir(struct block_device *bdev)
> +{
> + struct kobject *kobj = &bdev->bd_holder_dir;
> +
> + kobj->ktype = &bd_holder_ktype;
> + kobject_set_name(kobj, "holders");
> + kobj->parent = bdev_get_kobj(bdev);
> + kobject_init(kobj);
> + kobject_add(kobj);
> + kobject_put(kobj->parent);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void del_holder_dir(struct block_device *bdev)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Don't kobject_unregister to avoid memory allocation
> + * in kobject_hotplug.
> + */
> + kobject_del(&bdev->bd_holder_dir);
> + kobject_put(&bdev->bd_holder_dir);
> +}
No, do it correctly please.
thanks,
greg k-h
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]