On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 01:31:11PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 12:59, Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 02:57:54PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 05:59:42PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 15:44, Andy Shevchenko > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Will there be a user for this routine? If not, can we just drop it? > > > > > > The same question can be applied to the driver core part(s), e.g. > > > deferred_probe_exit() in dd.c). > > > > I noted that I missed __exitcall() here. But will wait for your answer. > > > > Ah ok, then it makes sense. Mind respinning with that added? Done! > > > The above basically what Greg KH told people to do. While it is partially cargo > > > cult here I can imagine that in some environments (virtual or kexec) somebody > > > would like to get a picture of (post-mortem?) analysis where it would be > > > helpful. Also code looks symmetrical in order to resource management. So, if > > > you insist, I'll remove it, although I personally like my variant. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
