Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:02:06 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Request for comments (kdev_t and friends...) |
| |
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > > But how is that different from the planned kdev_t? > > Your "struct block_device *" is precisely kdev_t.
No.
Notice that "kdev_t" implies that all devices have the same kind of pointer.
"struct block_device" implies that, for example, character devices are of a completely different type.
Also, the difference is in reference counting. The current setup assumes that you never have to "put" a reference to kdev_t, which is just broken in a dynamic environment - we do NOT want to be required to hold on to "struct block_device" data structures forever, we need to also clean them up after they are no longer referenced by anybody.
It's more of an evolution of kdev_t, and I agree with you 100% in that sense.
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |