From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Improve kobject handling in fs/ext4 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:51:05 -0500 Message-ID: <20171128035105.lec6u6y4p3qwgjde@thunk.org> References: <20171127231801.27652-1-sirmy15@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Riccardo Schirone Return-path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:33878 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753522AbdK1DvH (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:51:07 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171127231801.27652-1-sirmy15@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:17:58AM +0100, Riccardo Schirone wrote: > This patch tries to correctly use kobjects in fs/ext4. In particular it > allocates kobjects/ksets dynamically, instead of statically, and improve > error handling in case kobject_* functions fail. I don't see the point of allocating the kobjects in question dynamically? There is only one of them, so why not use static allocation? What is "incorrect" about not doing dynamically allocated kobjects/ksets? Regards, - Ted