Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] driver core: make software nodes available earlier

Dmitry Torokhov
2026-03-31T06:52:38Z

On March 30, 2026 11:25:33 PM PDT, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 02:46:45PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 11:24:45PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 02:40:47PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>
>...
>
>> > > -static void __exit software_node_exit(void)
>> > > -{
>> > > - ida_destroy(&swnode_root_ids);
>> > > - kset_unregister(swnode_kset);
>> > > }
>> > > -__exitcall(software_node_exit);
>> >
>> > Why? What's wrong with the __exitcall?
>>
>> It's dead code. Always was, always will be.
>>
>> Maybe split in a separate patch, but I sometimes feel the idea of "one
>> change" is taken to extreme and adds to both developer's and maintainers
>> burden by needing to keep track of extra patches.
>
>Why does __exitcall() exist then? It's also used in other places.
>I think it's generally good to have a possibility to clean up
>after run.
>

The code section will be discarded when the kernel finishes booting so it only increases image size on disk.

>A bit of archaeology:
>
>The first time it appeared was in the bcc2152647b8 ("Import 2.4.0-test3pre3").
>Then somehow spread a bit (but not much).
>

And it shows how useful it is. Maybe it had some purpose a long time ago, but at present time this code will never be executed since it cannot be built as a module.

Thanks.

--
Dmitry