From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755196AbYANJZm (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:25:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753680AbYANJZf (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:25:35 -0500 Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com ([195.33.99.129]:5224 "EHLO public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753679AbYANJZe convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:25:34 -0500 Message-Id: <478B38B2.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.2 HP Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:25:54 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Sam Ravnborg" Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] __cpuinitconst and __devinitconst References: <47873D11.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080111194428.GB29189@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080112205635.GA6059@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080113073024.GA30120@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080113214204.GB2205@uranus.ravnborg.org> <478B2C6F.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080114091728.GA6674@uranus.ravnborg.org> In-Reply-To: <20080114091728.GA6674@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> The one thing that I'm not sure is really consistent yet wrt. the >> constification is that now you need to write e.g. >> >> static const char __cpuinitcdata example[]; >> >> and (accidentally) omitting the 'const' (as it's really an apparently >> redundant thing now) as in >> >> static char __cpuinitcdata example[]; >> >> will cause section type conflicts (at the compiler or linker level). I >> therefore think that the 'const' should really be part of the >> __{cpu,mem,dev}cdata definitions (requiring the attribute to be >> placed properly, namely placement at the end of a declaration as >> is possible with __{cpu,mem,dev}initdata is then not an option here). > >I need to play a little with this before I make up my mind. >I do not like the concpet of hiding the const too much - it will >be non-obvious why the compiler complains if the only thing that >distingush const from non-const is a small capital 'c' within >__cpucinitdata (versus __cpuinitdata). That's the main reason I preferred __{cpu,mem,dev}initconst, as it makes it more obvious that the declared thing is 'const'. Jan