David Young <dyo...@pobox.com> wrote: > Previously, the code distinguished garbage collection, locking > acquisition, and resource-reclamation from each other by using > more, and more meaningful, subroutine names. Also, in the common > case, it collected and reclaimed garbage immediately at the end of > config_detach(9) instead of at some arbitrary time in the future (for > example, in the next call to device_lookup()). > > Your change obfuscates the code and needlessly postpones a lot of > garbage collection. Please back it out.
Your code had local a list of devices to G/C - it is redundant. Having resource freeing/destroying tied with last unlock operation will make sure that it wont be done with locks held - that is a common way. Perhaps names "lock/unlock" confuse you? It can be "enter/exit" or similar. Can you explain "arbitrary time in the future" and "needlessly postpones"? It does not change the previous behaviour. -- Mindaugas
