From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/11] arm: Support restart through restart handler
 call chain
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 19:19:47 -0700
Message-ID: <20140822021947.GA17788@roeck-us.net>
References: <1408495538-27480-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
 <1408495538-27480-5-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
 <53F69DBA.4070806@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Return-path: <linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53F69DBA.4070806@suse.de>
Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>, Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@gmail.com>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 03:32:42AM +0200, Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> Am 20.08.2014 02:45, schrieb Guenter Roeck:
> > The kernel core now supports a restart handler call chain for syste=
m
> > restart functions.
> >=20
> > With this change, the arm_pm_restart callback is now optional, so
> > drop its initialization and check if it is set before calling it.
> > Only call the kernel restart handler if arm_pm_restart is not set.
> [...]
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> > index 81ef686..ea279f7 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> > @@ -114,17 +114,13 @@ void soft_restart(unsigned long addr)
> >  	BUG();
> >  }
> > =20
> > -static void null_restart(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char =
*cmd)
> > -{
> > -}
> > -
> >  /*
> >   * Function pointers to optional machine specific functions
> >   */
> >  void (*pm_power_off)(void);
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(pm_power_off);
> > =20
> > -void (*arm_pm_restart)(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char *c=
md) =3D null_restart;
> > +void (*arm_pm_restart)(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char *c=
md);
>=20
> Stupid newbie question maybe, but isn't this variable uninitialized n=
ow,
> like any non-static variable in C99? Or does the kernel assure that a=
ll
> such "fields" are zero-initialized?
>=20
It is initialized with NULL, like all other global and static variables=
 in the
kernel (and like pm_power_off a few lines above).

Guenter