Re: [PATCH] kill hotplug init/exit section annotations

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:21:42 +0200
Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 08:11:20AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:57:31 -0600
> > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > No-one seems to see much value in these, and they cause about 90%
> > > of our problems with __init/__exit markers, so simply eliminate
> > > them. Rather than run over the whole tree removing them, this
> > > patch #defines them to be nops.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley
> > > <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > I'll probably be going after __exit after this one, but it makes
> > > sense to split them up, since the hotplug annotation removal looks
> > > uncontroversial, whereas __exit and discard section removal might
> > > produce more robust debate.  I also think doing the hotplug
> > > removal gives us 90% of the benefits and removes 90% of the
> > > section mismatch problems.
> > 
> > 
> > Since hotplug is so fundamental nowadays the value no longer
> > outweighs the pain/cost to me, so 
> 
> Granted for normal hotplug.
> 
> But my computer has neither CPU hotplug 


cpuhotplug is required for suspend/resume.



-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/