Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 16:08:04 +0100
From:   Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] printk: console: Allow each console to have its own
 loglevel
Message-ID: <YoZdVCfK4T8Ts2oS@chrisdown.name>
References: <YoUBh5BSsURDO71Z@chrisdown.name>
 <YoUR6RlzkCNG7BU0@kroah.com>
 <YoVM+KbdyJm8RSSr@chrisdown.name>
 <YoVO23+fvsNPnpKh@kroah.com>
 <YoVWpZKHD7aec0CJ@chrisdown.name>
 <YoXsAkUgzIjJR90W@kroah.com>
 <YoZQQwtG12Ypr2IC@chrisdown.name>
 <YoZVvA5FP4wFLSH9@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YoZVvA5FP4wFLSH9@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.4 (c3baa83e) (2022-04-30)
Precedence: bulk

Greg Kroah-Hartman writes:
>>  struct console {
>>  	char	name[16];
>>  	void	(*write)(struct console *, const char *, unsigned);
>> @@ -179,9 +173,11 @@ struct console {
>>  	void	*data;
>>  	struct	 console *next;
>>  	int	level;
>> -	struct	device classdev;
>> +	struct	device *classdev;
>
>Ick, no, keep the real structure here.  It can properly handle the
>reference counting for the object.  Just correctly clean up in the
>release function, not anywhere else.

Sorry, I'm getting more and more confused about what you're asking me to do, 
and less and less clear on the rationale.

Can you please clarify what "correctly cleaning up" would mean for a 
non-pointer `struct device'?

Is your concern that...

     register_console(c)
         device_initialize(c->d)
         device_add(c->d)
     unregister_console(c)
         device_unregister(c->d)      console_classdev_release(c->d)
     register_console(c)
         device_initialize(c->d)  <-- classdev was not previously zeroed out
				     in console_classdev_release() and bad 
				     things may happen

If that's not the point, I could really use some clarification about what 
"correctly cleaning up" means for a non-pointer `struct device' :-)