From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751563AbcGXNOI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 24 Jul 2016 09:14:08 -0400
Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:56061 "EHLO gate.crashing.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751425AbcGXNOH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 24 Jul 2016 09:14:07 -0400
Message-ID: <1469365988.8568.255.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: kexec: device shutdown vs. remove
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Joel Stanley <joel.stanley@au1.ibm.com>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@au1.ibm.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 23:13:08 +1000
In-Reply-To: <20160724051810.GA7663@roeck-us.net>
References: <1469307112.8568.224.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
	 <20160724051810.GA7663@roeck-us.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.4 (3.20.4-1.fc24) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, 2016-07-23 at 22:18 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> I suspect that using (or depending on) the remove function may not be feasible
> anymore after the recent effort by Paul Gortmaker to make drivers explicitly
> non-modular if they are only configurable as boolean. In many cases, this
> involved dropping remove functions.

A lot of drivers we care about are modular. But maybe the right
approach is to do something like remove() if it exist and shutdown() if
it doesn't ? Or a new callback for kexec ? quiesce() ?

Cheers,
Ben.