On Thu, 01 May 2008 17:05:59 -0500
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 23:34 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > On 05/01/2008 11:23 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:56:02 +0200
> > > Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >> megaraid_sas suspend and resume are inappropriatelly placed in
> > >> __devinit section.
> > >
> > > That's a box-killer, isn't it?
> >
> > I think so -- the non-CONFIG_HOTPLUG ones.
>
> CONFIG_HOTPLUG is only settable to 'n' if you're CONFIG_EMBEDDED which
> has a zero set intersection with the users of megaraid, so in practical
> terms, there's no actual box it could kill.
who suspends and resumes servers?
> this whole
>
> #if CONFIG_PM
> define suspend resume
> #else
> set suspend resume methods to null
> #endif
>
> Is completely analagous to what we used to do with CONFIG_HOTPLUG before
> we had the __dev.* sectional annotations. Since the expanding
> bureacracy is determined to keep the _dev.* sections
ooh, that makes us sound really bad! ("since the server-obsessed
embedded-hating bloatmonkeys..."?)
> in spite of the pain,
What pain? Other people write the dang patches for you! Their main
problem is getting them merged.
> could we not at least make the machinery do something vaguely
> useful and expand it to confine the pm routines to sections which can be
> discarded if CONFIG_PM is n?
a) it would need to be discarded at link-time, ideally.
b) worth investigating. It might lead to lengthy chains of compilation
warnings though.
--
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
