On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 10:19:46AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/15/2012 01:42 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Thierry Reding >> > <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:06:27AM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Thierry Reding >> >>> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> When using deferred driver probing, PCI host controller drivers may >> >>>> actually require this function after the init stage. >> >>>> >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >>>> --- >> >>>> Changes in v3: >> >>>> - none >> >>>> >> >>>> Changes in v2: >> >>>> - use __devinit annotations >> >>> >> >>> Your original patch removed __init completely. Here you change it to >> >>> __devinit. That means we decide whether to discard the function based >> >>> on whether CONFIG_HOTPLUG is supported. But I think your point is not >> >>> about hotplug; it's merely that we should be able to scan a PCI bus >> >>> after init-time. We ought to be able to do a late PCI scan even if >> >>> hotplug is not supported. >> >>> >> >>> Therefore, I'd be inclined to remove __init completely unless you have >> >>> another reason for preferring __devinit. >> >> >> >> I thought __devinit would resolve to nothing if HOTPLUG is defined and >> >> __init otherwise. That seemed more appropriate. However you are right >> >> that it is useful to always have it available, so I'm fine with removing >> >> the annotations altogether. Do you want me to follow up with a patch? Or >> >> can you just take the first version? I'm not sure if it still applies. >> > >> > You're right about how __devinit works. It's just that I don't think >> > hotplug is actually relevant here. We're trying to make >> > pci_fixup_irqs() work after init, whether it's because of hotplug or >> > simply because the arch scans host bridges after init. >> > >> > I applied this to my "next" branch. Thanks! >> >> Bjorn, I don't see this patch in next-20120907. Did it get dropped for >> some reason? > > Yes, it turns out that dropping the annotations causes lots of section > mismatches on other architectures. See here[0] for the details. I think > the solution to the issue would be to either remove HOTPLUG altogether > and drop __devinit and __devexit annotations or update all architectures > to fix these warnings. I think Bjorn and I settled on the latter because > it's obviously less intrusive. I've been busy building toolchains for > all the PCI architectures and I think I have all of them. I'll just need > some more time to build, find and fix any remaining section mismatches. Greg KH is actively removing CONFIG_HOTPLUG altogether -- see https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/4/489 That will make __devinit resolve to nothing in all cases, and we'll eventually remove __devinit completely. So we don't want to convert __init to __devinit; we have to remove the __init altogether. I think that means we have to update all arches first to avoid the section mismatches. So I think Thierry is on the right track: 1) Change all arch pcibios_update_irq() implementations (and probably a few other things) to be non-__init 2) Change pci_fixup_irqs() to be non-__init Bjorn -- 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
