On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:21:42 +0200 Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 08:11:20AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:57:31 -0600 > > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > No-one seems to see much value in these, and they cause about 90% > > > of our problems with __init/__exit markers, so simply eliminate > > > them. Rather than run over the whole tree removing them, this > > > patch #defines them to be nops. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley > > > <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > I'll probably be going after __exit after this one, but it makes > > > sense to split them up, since the hotplug annotation removal looks > > > uncontroversial, whereas __exit and discard section removal might > > > produce more robust debate. I also think doing the hotplug > > > removal gives us 90% of the benefits and removes 90% of the > > > section mismatch problems. > > > > > > Since hotplug is so fundamental nowadays the value no longer > > outweighs the pain/cost to me, so > > Granted for normal hotplug. > > But my computer has neither CPU hotplug cpuhotplug is required for suspend/resume. -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
