On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2018-12-13 16:10:37, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:44:23AM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > +static void klp_free_funcs(struct klp_object *obj)
> > > {
> > > struct klp_func *func;
> > >
> > > - for (func = obj->funcs; func->old_name && func != limit; func++)
> > > - kobject_put(&func->kobj);
> > > + klp_for_each_func(obj, func) {
> > > + /* Might be called from klp_init_patch() error path. */
> > > + if (func->kobj_alive) {
> > > + func->kobj_alive = false;
> > > + kobject_put(&func->kobj);
> > > + }
> >
> > Why does it set 'kobj_alive' to false? The value will never be read
> > again anyway, right?
>
> You are right. I'll remove it in v15.
>
> My intention was that it might signalize that the kobject is being
> freed and eventually affect the behavior of sysfs-related callbacks.
> But in reality, it should be handled by some per-patch flag instead
> of a per-object one.
>
>
> > Also, the name isn't quite right. The kobject is technically still
> > alive here, and may even continue to be alive after the kobject_put(),
> > if there's a sysfs reference to it somewhere.
> >
> > Maybe it should be called something like 'kobj_initialized' instead.
> > Then it doesn't ever need to be set to false -- unless I'm missing
> > something.
>
> This might cause confusion with kobj.state_initialized. This internal
> kobject flag is set when the reference counter is initialized. But
> it is true even before kobject_add() is called.
>
> We need a flag that signalizes that kobject_add() succeeded and we
> can and must call kobject_put().
>
> What about calling it 'kobj_added'?
Sounds good to me.
--
Josh
