On 2/8/21 8:19 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 05:57:17PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
On 2/8/21 3:36 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
...
char name[CMA_MAX_NAME];
+#ifdef CONFIG_CMA_SYSFS
+ struct cma_stat *stat;
This should not be a pointer. By making it a pointer, you've added a bunch of pointless
extra code to the implementation.
Originally, I went with the object lifetime with struct cma as you
suggested to make code simple. However, Greg KH wanted to have
release for kobj_type since it is consistent with other kboject
handling.
Are you talking about the kobj in your new struct cma_stat? That seems
like circular logic if so. I'm guessing Greg just wanted kobj methods
to be used *if* you are dealing with kobjects. That's a narrower point.
I can't imagine that he would have insisted on having additional
allocations just so that kobj freeing methods could be used. :)
I have no objection if Greg agree static kobject is okay in this
case. Greg?
What I meant is, no kobject at all in the struct cma_stat member
variable. The lifetime of the cma_stat member is the same as the
containing struct, so no point in putting a kobject into it.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
