Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] PM: Revert "Add EXPORT macros for exporting PM functions"

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 08:18:19PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 5:33 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 05:27:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 5:13 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 05:09:29PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 4:44 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The introduced macros are not doing what they intend for, namely
> > > > > > they won't eliminate the code when CONFIG_PM=n.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think they have ever been expected to eliminate the code then.
> > > > > They just don't export the symbols in that case.
> > > >
> > > > Then I'm really puzzled with (potential) usefulness of them to begin with.
> > > > Having a dead code that is not exported is doubtful benefit.
> > >
> > > Arguably, exported dead code is even worse.
> > >
> > > Anyway, it is hard to say what they are good for if there are no users.
> > >
> > > My point really is that you don't need to add anything beyond "this
> > > stuff has no users" to get it removed and arguing about what the
> > > unused stuff was intended for is not very useful so to speak.
> >
> > I see. Shall I send a v3 with the reduced commit message?
> 
> It's there in my queue and I can take care of the changelog, so no need.

Ah, thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko