>>> On 09.05.12 at 18:08, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On 09.05.12 at 17:54, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> My inclination is that all PCI fixups should work the same for >>> hot-added devices as for those present at boot, which would suggest >>> that we should always use __devinit, not __init. If I'm missing >>> something, please educate me :) >> >> That's certainly possible - I simply based the patch on what is there >> currently. > > Yep, your patch makes perfect sense considering the tree as it is > today. But if you agree with my sense of what it *should* be, I think > we should leave things as they are, or work on moving everything I indeed wondered why it isn't that way while doing this. > towards __devinit (I'd be thrilled if you wanted to work on that :)). > Otherwise we'd just be changing things to __init that we'd have to > change back later. I'd perhaps rather drop my patches then, as the main benefit (moving stuff from resident text to init text) would go away. Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
