[PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[Mike Frysinger]

The remove member of the virtio_driver structure uses __devexit_p(), so
the remove function itself should be marked with __devexit.  And where
there be __devexit on the remove, so is there __devinit on the probe.

Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
---
note: i dont actually know anything about virtio_blk, so this isnt
tested in any way.  simply noticed the hotplug discrepancies.

 drivers/block/virtio_blk.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
index 5d34764..bc4fabf 100644
--- a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
+++ b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static int index_to_minor(int index)
 	return index << PART_BITS;
 }
 
-static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
+static int __devinit virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 {
 	struct virtio_blk *vblk;
 	int err;
@@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ out:
 	return err;
 }
 
-static void virtblk_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
+static void __devexit virtblk_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 {
 	struct virtio_blk *vblk = vdev->priv;
 
-- 
1.6.3

Re: [PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[Rusty Russell]

On Mon, 18 May 2009 05:09:09 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> -static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> +static int __devinit virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)

This makes sense, I think, but then it implies that virtio_dev_probe() should 
also be __devinit, right?

And I look at pci_bus_probe(), and it's not __devinit.

Is the PCI code just slack?
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[Rusty Russell]

On Mon, 18 May 2009 05:09:09 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> -static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> +static int __devinit virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)

This makes sense, I think, but then it implies that virtio_dev_probe() should 
also be __devinit, right?

And I look at pci_bus_probe(), and it's not __devinit.

Is the PCI code just slack?
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[Jesse Barnes]

On Wed, 20 May 2009 00:10:51 +0930
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 May 2009 05:09:09 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > -static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > +static int __devinit virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> 
> This makes sense, I think, but then it implies that
> virtio_dev_probe() should also be __devinit, right?
> 
> And I look at pci_bus_probe(), and it's not __devinit.
> 
> Is the PCI code just slack?

I wouldn't be surprised if some annotations were missing or incorrect
given the churn in hotplug lately, but I can't find that particular
symbol...

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] virtio_blk: add missing __dev{init,exit} markings

[Jesse Barnes]

On Wed, 20 May 2009 00:10:51 +0930
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 May 2009 05:09:09 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > -static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > +static int __devinit virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> 
> This makes sense, I think, but then it implies that
> virtio_dev_probe() should also be __devinit, right?
> 
> And I look at pci_bus_probe(), and it's not __devinit.
> 
> Is the PCI code just slack?

I wouldn't be surprised if some annotations were missing or incorrect
given the churn in hotplug lately, but I can't find that particular
symbol...

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center