From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [patch] ata: libata: add per device private data Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 11:07:30 -0400 Message-ID: <47025EB2.6010606@pobox.com> References: <20070924162314.408ece21.kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:36625 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752447AbXJBPHe (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 11:07:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070924162314.408ece21.kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Kristen Carlson Accardi Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > Allow host controllers to store private data per device. > > Signed-off-by: Kristen Carlson Accardi > > --- > include/linux/libata.h | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > Index: libata-dev/include/linux/libata.h > =================================================================== > --- libata-dev.orig/include/linux/libata.h 2007-09-24 16:13:33.000000000 -0700 > +++ libata-dev/include/linux/libata.h 2007-09-24 16:15:24.000000000 -0700 > @@ -474,6 +474,9 @@ struct ata_device { > /* error history */ > struct ata_ering ering; > int spdn_cnt; > + > + /* controller driver per device private data */ > + void *private_data; I don't have any objections to this per se... a lot of other subsystems do this too, and I can certainly see a potential need. But what about object lifetimes? If a controller is hot-unplugged, does anyone need notification to destroy dynamic objects, or does controller cleanup take care of that? If a device is unplugged, where should a controller driver do its ->private_data cleanup? This is /not/ a NAK, just a request to make clear the lifetime rules and procedures... Jeff