From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3EF88216.6010106@austin.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:53:42 -0500 From: Nathan Lynch MIME-Version: 1.0 To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: Proposal for device-tree walking semantics Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: (Apologies if this doesn't get associated with the original post correctly, the original post was forwarded to me.) I've been looking at this issue a bit from the ppc64 side. > The get() function is actually more a try_get() > (the idea is that a remove in progress would make it fail) Regarding removal of nodes, how might the removal of files under /proc/device-tree be handled? Note that the data pointers associated with each proc entry refer to struct property's, not device_node's. Should the struct property's have refcounts too? Also note that add_node() in fs/proc/proc_devtree.c creates symbolic links; I haven't been able to come up with a pleasing solution for removing those. It seems to require a manual traversal of the proc_dir_entry's subdir list, an operation during which the procfs code holds the big kernel lock (e.g. proc_lookup()). I agree with renaming device_node to of_node. Nathan ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/