From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759024AbYAJJzG (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:55:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752900AbYAJJy4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:54:56 -0500 Received: from smtp6.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.153.40]:37892 "EHLO smtp6.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751944AbYAJJyz (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:54:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:54:07 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Andi Kleen Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, pavel@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH x86] [15/16] Force __cpuinit on for CONFIG_PM without HOTPLUG_CPU Message-ID: <20080110095407.GB28740@does.not.exist> References: <20080103442.621670000@suse.de> <20080103154229.9723F14DDD@wotan.suse.de> <20080103181438.GA7141@does.not.exist> <200801031943.43828.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200801031943.43828.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 07:43:43PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thursday 03 January 2008 19:14:38 Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 04:42:29PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > This avoids the requirement to mark a lot of initialization functions not > > > __cpuinit just for resume from RAM. > > > > > > More functions could be converted now, didn't do all. > > >... > > > > Shouldn't this aready be handled by the following? > > > > config PM_SLEEP_SMP > > bool > > depends on SUSPEND_SMP_POSSIBLE || HIBERNATION_SMP_POSSIBLE > > depends on PM_SLEEP > > select HOTPLUG_CPU > > default y > > Won't help for UP at least. I know that it's not popular to care about the kernel size, but your patch will cost precious memory in the common case of UP embedded systems with CONFIG_PM=y. It seems the correct solution would be not to hijack __cpuinit (as your patch does), but to create a new annotation. > -Andi cu Adrian BTW: Is there any good reason why your patch is x86 only? No matter how this gets handled, it should be an architecture independent issue. -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed