From: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
To: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] debugfs: remove module_exit()
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 07:56:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101201155635.GA29078@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CF5EC28.6060402@redhat.com>
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 02:33:12PM +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> On 12/01/10 09:35, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 04:19:58AM -0500, Amerigo Wang wrote:
> >>debugfs can't be a module, so module_exit() is meaningless
> >>for it.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: WANG Cong<amwang@redhat.com>
> >>
> >>---
> >>diff --git a/fs/debugfs/inode.c b/fs/debugfs/inode.c
> >>index 37a8ca7..d38c88f 100644
> >>--- a/fs/debugfs/inode.c
> >>+++ b/fs/debugfs/inode.c
> >>@@ -13,9 +13,6 @@
> >> *
> >> */
> >>
> >>-/* uncomment to get debug messages from the debug filesystem, ah the irony. */
> >>-/* #define DEBUG */
> >
> >Why did you remove these lines? They don't pertain to this patch.
>
> These lines are obsolete.
Even if they were (and hint, I don't think they are), they have nothing
to do with the patch you created so they don't belong here. The rule is
"one patch per logical change" and you didn't even describe that you
were removing these lines in the changelog entry, so that's two strikes
against removing these lines.
> >>-
> >> #include<linux/module.h>
> >> #include<linux/fs.h>
> >> #include<linux/mount.h>
> >>@@ -540,17 +537,5 @@ static int __init debugfs_init(void)
> >>
> >> return retval;
> >> }
> >>-
> >>-static void __exit debugfs_exit(void)
> >>-{
> >>- debugfs_registered = false;
> >>-
> >>- simple_release_fs(&debugfs_mount,&debugfs_mount_count);
> >>- unregister_filesystem(&debug_fs_type);
> >>- kobject_put(debug_kobj);
> >>-}
> >
> >When the code is built into the kernel, the __exit function should go
> >away, so this isn't costing us any extra memory, right?
>
>
> Perhaps, but this can still reduce the vmlinux size, right?
Which really doesn't matter, right? How much is it reduced?
> >And debugfs used to be able to be built as a module, perhaps it will be
> >in the future? I don't think this patch is really needed.
> >
>
> Huh? Wasn't it a module before?
Yes it was.
> I think the problem is tracers use debugfs, it needs to depends on DEBUGFS=y.
So if you disable tracing, then you could use debugfs as a module,
right? So the patch should not be applied.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-01 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-09 9:19 [Patch] debugfs: remove module_exit() Amerigo Wang
2010-12-01 1:35 ` Greg KH
2010-12-01 6:33 ` Cong Wang
2010-12-01 15:56 ` Greg KH [this message]
2010-12-02 3:17 ` Cong Wang
2010-12-02 3:59 ` Greg KH
2010-12-02 4:15 ` Cong Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101201155635.GA29078@suse.de \
--to=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).