On 11/27, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:17:58AM +0100, Riccardo Schirone wrote: > > This patch tries to correctly use kobjects in fs/ext4. In particular it > > allocates kobjects/ksets dynamically, instead of statically, and improve > > error handling in case kobject_* functions fail. > > I don't see the point of allocating the kobjects in question > dynamically? There is only one of them, so why not use static > allocation? What is "incorrect" about not doing dynamically allocated > kobjects/ksets? > > Regards, > > - Ted According to Documentation/kobject.txt that's how they should be allocated. The reason for this being they are dynamic objects, so you don't really know what is their life time. Other parts of the kernel could get a reference to those kobjects (since they are registered in the system) and it's not said the module is the last one to access them. If you declare them statically, what would happen when you remove the module that statically defines them? What if there's still someone holding a reference to one of those kobjects? Regards, Riccardo
