From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: geert@linux-m68k.org (Geert Uytterhoeven) Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 15:44:29 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v7 08/11] arm/arm64: Unexport restart handlers In-Reply-To: <54806F2A.7070107@roeck-us.net> References: <1408495538-27480-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <1408495538-27480-9-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <54806F2A.7070107@roeck-us.net> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi G?nther, On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 12/04/2014 05:36 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:45 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> Implementing a restart handler in a module don't make sense >>> as there would be no guarantee that the module is loaded when >>> a restart is needed. Unexport arm_pm_restart to ensure that >>> no one gets the idea to do it anyway. >> >> Why not? I was just going to do that, but I got greeted by: > > Because you should register a restart handler instead, like the other > drivers in the same directory now do. That's a different thing. "there would be no guarantee that the module is loaded when a restart is needed" is also valid for restart handlers... >> ERROR: "arm_pm_restart" [drivers/power/reset/rmobile-reset.ko] undefined! >> >> So now we have to make sure all reset drivers for a zillion different >> hardware devices are builtin, and can't be modular? >> > No. All those drivers need to do is to register a restart handler using > the API provided in the patch series. > > Ultimately all restart handlers should do that and arm_pm_restart should > go away entirely. That was the point of the patch series. Good. That's what I'm doing right know ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds