On 10/05/2014 08:25 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 07:09:50PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:24:57PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 06:13:05PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
No driver should be working with "raw" kobjects.
I don't agree, but it'
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 07:09:50PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:24:57PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 06:13:05PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
> > > > No driver should be working with "raw" kobjects.
> > >
> > > I don't agree, but it's irrelevant.
> >
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:24:57PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 06:13:05PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
> > > No driver should be working with "raw" kobjects.
> >
> > I don't agree, but it's irrelevant.
>
> Not at all. I'd wager that if a driver is messing around with a "raw"
>
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 06:13:05PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
> > No driver should be working with "raw" kobjects.
>
> I don't agree, but it's irrelevant.
Not at all. I'd wager that if a driver is messing around with a "raw"
kobject, it is doing something seriously wrong. Of course there are
ex
> No driver should be working with "raw" kobjects.
I don't agree, but it's irrelevant. If the functions are exported and
documented, the documentation should be complete.
> kobject_init() has been there for a very long time, and yes, we don't
> always have the best naming scheme in the kernel, th
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:47:42PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
> > Is there any in-kernel code that does not properly zero out the memory
> > before calling kobject_init()?
>
> I'm not sure. I didn't find any, but I've seen it bite people writing
> drivers more than once where I work, and the lates
> Is there any in-kernel code that does not properly zero out the memory
> before calling kobject_init()?
I'm not sure. I didn't find any, but I've seen it bite people writing
drivers more than once where I work, and the latest oops I just
debugged a few days ago prompted me to address the issue a
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:02:14PM -0400, Jason Noakes wrote:
> I noticed that kobject_init() requres the kobject passed in to be zeroed out
> fully first.
That is because people were trying to reuse objects without destroying
them first. So try to detect this and prevent the developer from doing
I noticed that kobject_init() requres the kobject passed in to be
zeroed out fully first.
Many other *_init kernel routines (cdev_init, kref_init, mutex_init,
spin_lock_init, etc) do not have the same requirement - they work on
fully uninitialized memory.
Documentation/kobject.txt does not mentio
9 matches
Mail list logo
