On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:01:14PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 07/14/2014 07:55 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > >> index 43b7c34..b2da6d5 100644 > >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > >> @@ -174,6 +174,8 @@ void machine_restart(char *cmd) > >> /* Now call the architecture specific reboot code. */ > >> if (arm_pm_restart) > >> arm_pm_restart(reboot_mode, cmd); > >> + else > >> + kernel_restart_notify(cmd); > > > > There are couple of drivers specific to arm64, once they are converted > > we can get rid of arm_pm_restart entirely here. > > I thought you wanted to keep exporting arm_pm_restart. No, I just thought you don't want the restart mechanism implemented in modules but the notifier registration still allows that, so I didn't fully get the reasoning. But I agree on the race aspect. > That logically implies > that you want to have the ability to write new drivers which use it, which > in turn implies that converting existing drivers would not make much sense. If the new handler registration mechanism gives the functionality, I don't see why we should keep arm_pm_restart around (for arm64 it's easier since there aren't many drivers setting it). -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
