From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Mack Subject: Re: kdbus: add code for buses, domains and endpoints Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:55:27 +0100 Message-ID: <54535C8F.30707@zonque.org> References: <1414620056-6675-1-git-send-email-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <1414620056-6675-9-git-send-email-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20141031013922.GG7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141031013922.GG7996-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Al Viro , Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, john.stultz-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org, tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, marcel-kz+m5ild9QBg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, desrt-0xnayjDhYQY@public.gmane.org, hadess-0MeiytkfxGOsTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org, dh.herrmann-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, tixxdz-Umm1ozX2/EEdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, simon.mcvittie-ZGY8ohtN/8pPYcu2f3hruQ@public.gmane.org, alban.crequy-ZGY8ohtN/8pPYcu2f3hruQ@public.gmane.org, javier.martinez-ZGY8ohtN/8pPYcu2f3hruQ@public.gmane.org, teg-B22kvLQNl6c@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 10/31/2014 02:39 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 03:00:52PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> See Documentation/kdbus.txt for more details. > > ... which has nothing whatsoever on object lifetime rules. True. That document only describes the external API exposed by the driver towards userspace. > Could you > folks please document that somewhere? What pins what, what state > transitions are possible, etc. Hmm, I'll see whether I can write something up. > BTW, the calling conventions for your foo_new() are annoying - instead of > "return -E... or 0, storing the reference to new object in var parameter > passed as the last argument", could you please just return ERR_PTR(-E...) > on error, a pointer to new object on success and to hell with those > struct foo **foo in the argument lists? No problem at all. We'll change that around. Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated! Daniel