From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Gortmaker Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: delete __cpuinit usage from all users Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:36:08 -0400 Message-ID: <51C0A898.4020909@windriver.com> References: <1371501264-12546-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <1371509247.8130.34.camel@dabdike> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Cc: Helge Deller , To: James Bottomley Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1371509247.8130.34.camel@dabdike> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On 13-06-17 06:47 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 16:34 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> The __cpuinit type of throwaway sections might have made sense >> some time ago when RAM was more constrained, but now the savings >> do not offset the cost and complications. For example, the fix in >> commit 5e427ec2d0 ("x86: Fix bit corruption at CPU resume time") >> is a good example of the nasty type of bugs that can be created >> with improper use of the various __init prefixes. >> >> After a discussion on LKML[1] it was decided that cpuinit should go >> the way of devinit and be phased out. Once all the users are gone, >> we can then finally remove the macros themselves from linux/init.h. > > Fine by us ... I'd recommend just rolling this into one patch for all > the cpuinit tags and sending it via the trivial tree (which goes to > linux-next) that way we'll know if we do anything to compromise it. Thanks James, I'll add an ack'd by for you and keep it with the arch agnostic chunks. I do want it to go by the arch maintainers 1st though, and give them 1st right of refusal on carrying the change; e.g. for MIPS, Ralf wanted to carry the patch due to the level of tree activity still pending there. And for sparc, it touches some trampoline code, so I want to be sure I don't inflict a silent boot death on the SPARC folks. It will get in linux-next though -- I'll be asking Stephen for that shortly. P. -- > > James > >