From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from services.gcu-squad.org (zoneX.GCU-Squad.org [194.213.125.0]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB22D2C009A for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:38:40 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 14:37:43 +0100 From: Jean Delvare To: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 207/493] i2c: remove use of __devinit Message-ID: <20121120143743.3f54a3cb@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20121120132342.GP3332@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1353349642-3677-1-git-send-email-wfp5p@virginia.edu> <1353349642-3677-207-git-send-email-wfp5p@virginia.edu> <20121120092046.24496415@endymion.delvare> <20121120132342.GP3332@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Rudolf Marek , Tony Lindgren , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Guan Xuetao , Wolfram Sang , "Mark M. Hoffman" , Bill Pemberton , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Ben Dooks , Barry Song , Olof Johansson , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:23:42 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 09:20:46AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > > > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:22:36 -0500, Bill Pemberton wrote: > > > CONFIG_HOTPLUG is going away as an option so __devinit is no longer > > > needed. > > > > Can you please point me/us to the discussion explaining the rationale > > behind this move, and the explanation of what will be done exactly? > > While I can easily understand that we want to drop CONFIG_HOTPLUG and > > always enable hot-plug support, I don't see where we are going with > > removing __devinit annotations and the like. > > It's actually very simple to understand. > > 1. CONFIG_HOTPLUG is going away; it's already defined to always be 'Y'. > 2. This means that the the devinit sections will not be discarded anymore. > 3. As a result, there's no point the devinit sections existing anymore. > 4. As there's no devinit sections, the __devinit marker is entirely > redundant and useless. Ah, yes, very simple indeed. Not sure how I managed to not understand it earlier today. Thanks for explaining. > The reason this is being done is because the benefit to cost ratio of this > is far too high; it's well proven that people constantly get these markings > wrong, and with most kernels having had hotplug enabled anyway, it's not > providing much in the way of space saving benefit over the number of section > conflicts it causes. So, it's been decided a few years ago that this is Yes, I completely agree. > going to happen, with that justification, and it's been accepted by 300 > odd kernel developers in at least one kernel summit when it was talked Probably that was one I didn't attend to, as I can't remember this discussion. > about... and it's been mentioned on mailing lists several times. Maybe LKML, which I don't read. So I wasn't aware of the plan before seeing Bill's patches. -- Jean Delvare