On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 09:15 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > If you want to manage lifetime rules independently you might want to > not embed struct device into you subsystems objects but attach them > via pointers and use device_create(). Now that we orphan sysfs access > upon unregistering device this will severe all ties from driver core > to your system once you start teardown of a device and you should be > in clear.
But that wouldn't really help ... all objects have lifetimes. What Tejun is pointing out is that we have two different lifetime requirements: driver internal (and subsystem) objects and sysfs objects ... we still need something embedded in the driver objects, so it may as well be struct device ... trying to manage struct device outside of the driver objects would turn into another nasty refcounting problem. The struct device is usually the generic abstraction of the specific structure it's embedded in, so I think it really does make sense to keep these pieces together. > However there are simpler subsystems (input, serio, etc.) where there > is only one core module which provides services to device drivers and > handles registration and deregistration. For such substustems it makes > sense to embed struct devices and manage lifetime for all components > at once. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
