From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-da0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:57923 "EHLO mail-da0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757261Ab2K3Url (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:47:41 -0500 Received: by mail-da0-f46.google.com with SMTP id p5so373326dak.19 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:47:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:47:36 -0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] init.h: Remove __dev* sections from the kernel Message-ID: <20121130204736.GB32483@kroah.com> References: <20121129184133.GA15110@kroah.com> <20121129184328.GB15110@kroah.com> <50B9198F.7050806@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50B9198F.7050806@zytor.com> Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell , Jim Cromie , Borislav Petkov , Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , Michal Marek , Tony Lindgren , Jonathan Kliegman , Chris Zankel , Bill Pemberton , Fengguang Wu , Sam Ravnborg , linux-kbuild On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:39:43PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 11/29/2012 10:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > >-/* Used for HOTPLUG */ > >-#define __devinit __section(.devinit.text) __cold notrace > >-#define __devinitdata __section(.devinit.data) > >-#define __devinitconst __constsection(.devinit.rodata) > >-#define __devexit __section(.devexit.text) __exitused __cold notrace > >-#define __devexitdata __section(.devexit.data) > >-#define __devexitconst __constsection(.devexit.rodata) > >+/* Used for HOTPLUG, but that is always enabled now, so just make them noops */ > >+#define __devinit > >+#define __devinitdata > >+#define __devinitconst > >+#define __devexit > >+#define __devexitdata > >+#define __devexitconst > > > > Second question... what about the __exitused __cold notrace annotations? __exitused shouldn't matter, we shouldn't be optimizing these away at all anymore. I don't know about __cold and notrace, but given that these could be traced, I don't see why that marking got there in the first place. In reading compiler-gcc4.h, and knowing just how infrequent these functions are ever called, I would be amazed if the __cold marking ever even helped anything out here. thanks, greg k-h