RE: [patch 05/10] acpi: use __init* on everythingintables/tbfadt.c

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>this even further - the code should have been written const-correct
>and __init-ready (iirc Windows also has a concept of init code) from
>the beginning in my opinion

It's often tough to do these kinds of things because ACPICA runs on over
at least a dozen different operating systems. No, the base code does not
use __init anywhere.

And of course the use of const seems to be one of those religious
issues, so we can't make everyone happy.

Bob


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 12:43 PM
>To: trenn@xxxxxxx
>Cc: Moore, Robert; lenb@xxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
>acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [patch 05/10] acpi: use __init* on
everythingintables/tbfadt.c
>
>>>> Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> 05/01/08 8:55 PM >>>
>>Andrew, IMO you can drop this and the const cleanups from -mm tree.
>>
>>Jan, nearly all code in:
>>drivers/acpi/*/*.[hc]
>>is part of ACPICA. This currently still is (may change) an Intel
>>internal repository which gets synced to several OS implementations,
>>also Linux. __init does not exist there (yet).
>
>I'm fairly sure I saw __init used elsewhere in ACPI CA code, so I
>didn't think adding mode stuff like this would cause problems (as
>long as the changes were correct of course).
>
>>Also the const changes may be a bit of a pain -> this is what Robert
>>meant with as long as it won't end in a chain of const cleanups :)
>
>Of course they're a pain now. But see below.
>
>>The whole code gets style cleaned up through Lindent and manually to
>>half way fit to the Linux kernel style when things get merged.
>>
>>Currently Robert has to readjust this to ACPICA coding style by hand
>>and merge it into the internal Intel repository. Len has to pick it up
>>somewhat later and merge it back to the Linux kernel...
>>
>>Therefore I expect for cleanup patches (this one is on the edge, but I
>>could understand Intel if they hold it off) the best is to wait until
>>Intel publishs ACPICA as CVS or whatever repository on their
>>lesswatts.org site.
>
>That's brave to say - I've been seeing this kind of significant cleanup
>potential about seven years ago (when I wasn't dealing with ACPI CA
>on Linux, yet), so I have to admit I find it a little odd (at least) to
>defer
>this even further - the code should have been written const-correct
>and __init-ready (iirc Windows also has a concept of init code) from
>the beginning in my opinion. ANyway, the purpose of both patches
>was to try and get this cleanup started in Linux or at least turn
>attention to this on the ACPI CA side.
>
>Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux