Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759230AbYGDN5z (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:57:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754418AbYGDN5n (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:57:43 -0400 Received: from qb-out-0506.google.com ([72.14.204.239]:50562 "EHLO qb-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753635AbYGDN5m (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:57:42 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=O1txIgpJ9da4/jVCavX7czokHFJ3mJvieD4OeR7ZfUEoGx6nbr6aGsbm6tgCl9ycUE d94E50TZq5Qfj86N8nf3+dsrnelLTzcUTkZbsWLz1GpLrSRY/fjouGrQbR1/F6xEMpEW LGOZ54fHJxKXLtPdJW6XkDRemwcJ+u6Q+QFA0= Message-ID: <486E2C3B.6020603@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:57:15 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20071114) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric W. Biederman" CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Daniel Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , Linux Containers , Benjamin Thery , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] driver core: Implement tagged directory support for device classes. References: <20080618170729.808539948@theryb.frec.bull.fr> <486C4515.1070007@gmail.com> <486CB051.5000507@fr.ibm.com> <486CF71F.5090405@gmail.com> <486DD650.3000804@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2011 Lines: 46 Hello, Eric. Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Thank you for your opinion. > > Incremental patches to make things more beautiful are welcome. > > Please remember we are not building lisp. The goal is code that works today. > > Since we are not talking about correctness of the code. Since we are not > talking about interfaces with user space. Since we are talking something > that is currently about 100 lines of code, and so will be easy to change > even after it is merged. I don't understand how discussing this further > is useful. Especially when I get a NAK based on the feel that the code > is ugly. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression of being draconian. Explanations below. > As for your main objection. Adding a accessor method to an object versus > adding a data field that contain the same thing. The two are effectively > identical. With the practical difference in my eyes that an accessor method > prevents data duplication which reduces maintenance and reduces skew problems, > and it keeps the size of struct kobject small. Since you think methods are > horrible I must respectfully disagree with you. Yeah, it seems we should agree to disagree here. I think using callback for static values is a really bad idea. It obfuscates the code and opens up a big hole for awful misuses. Greg, what do you think? As we're very close to rc1 window, I think we can work out a solution here. The reason why I nack'd was because the change wouldn't take too much effort and I thought it could be done before -rc1. Unless you disagree with making tags static values, I'll try to write up a patch to do so. If you (and Greg) think the callback interface is better, we can merge the code as-is and update (or not) later. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/