On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > > + * If the function is successful, the only way to properly clean up > > > > > the > > > > > + * memory is with a call to kobject_del(). > > > > > > > > In which case kobject_put() isn't needed? > > > > > > kobject_del() should only undo what kobject_add() did. So kobject_put() > > > will still be needed to clean up the memory. Perhaps the wording should > > > be: > > > > > > If the function is successful, the only way to properly clean up the > > > kobject is to call kobject_del() for removing the kobject from the > > > hierarchy and to subsequently call kobject_put() to clean up the memory. > > > > But that's not what the code does today in the kobject_del() function. > > Hm, if I'm not completely confused, kobject_del() just gives up the > extra reference obtained by kobject_add(). That leaves the initial > reference we got via kobject_init(_ng)(). If we want to clean up the > memory, we need to give up that reference as well.
That's right. Furthermore there are other parts of the kernel that expect to do the kobject_del() and the final kobject_put() separately. For example, the driver core does kobject_del() as part of device_del() and then it does the final kobject_put() as part of put_device(). Alan Stern -- 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/
