Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752422AbWCFVHq (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:07:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752423AbWCFVHq (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:07:46 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:52889 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752421AbWCFVHp (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:07:45 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC: core EDAC support code From: Arjan van de Ven To: Dave Peterson Cc: Greg KH , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <200603061301.37923.dsp@llnl.gov> References: <200601190414.k0J4EZCV021775@hera.kernel.org> <200603061052.57188.dsp@llnl.gov> <20060306195348.GB8777@kroah.com> <200603061301.37923.dsp@llnl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 22:07:41 +0100 Message-Id: <1141679261.5568.13.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 620 Lines: 18 > Is it more desirable to dynamically allocate kobjects than to declare > them statically? Yes > If so, I'd be curious to know why dynamic > allocation is preferred over static allocation. because the lifetime of the kobject is independent of the lifetime of the memory of your static allocation. Separate lifetimes -> separate memory is a very good design principle. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/