From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] drivers/acpi: remove unused exported functions Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:38:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20041110233833.GD1099@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20041105215021.GF1295@stusta.de> <1099707007.13834.1969.camel@d845pe> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1099707007.13834.1969.camel@d845pe> Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Len Brown Cc: Adrian Bunk , ACPI Developers , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > The patch below completely removes 7 functions that were > > EXPORT_SYMBOL'ed but had exactly zero users in the kernel and makes > > another one that was previously EXPORT_SYMBOL'ed static. > > > > It also removes another unused global function to completely remove > > drivers/acpi/hardware/hwtimer.c which contained no function used > > anywhere in the kernel. > > > > Please comment on whether this patch is correct or whether in-kernel > > users of these functions are pending. > > > > > > diffstat output: > > drivers/acpi/acpi_ksyms.c | 8 - > > drivers/acpi/events/evxfevnt.c | 191 ----------------------------- > > drivers/acpi/hardware/Makefile | 2 > > drivers/acpi/hardware/hwtimer.c | 200 > > ------------------------------- > > drivers/acpi/resources/rsxface.c | 52 -------- > > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 6 > > drivers/acpi/utilities/utxface.c | 89 ------------- > > include/acpi/achware.h | 17 -- > > include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 1 > > include/acpi/acpixf.h | 24 --- > > 10 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 584 deletions(-) > > No, I can't apply this one as-is. > Some of these routines are not called now > simply because Linux/ACPI is evolving and we don't > yet take advantage of some of the things supported > by ACPICA core we use. I believe right thing to do is remove them now, and re-add them later (if they are ever needed). Single line patch somewhere which happens to pull whole evxfevnt.c would be pretty "expensive", but would not certainly look so... Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click