[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <493994B35A117E4F832F97C4719C4C0401EE048E46@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:02:28 -0800
From: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pm <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] kernel/cpu.c: Add right qualifiers for
intel_thermal_interrupt() and cpu_hotplug_pm_sync_init()
> > -int cpu_hotplug_pm_sync_init(void)
> > +static int __init cpu_hotplug_pm_sync_init(void)
> > {
> > pm_notifier(cpu_hotplug_pm_callback, 0);
>
> pm_notifier() macro will declare a static variable. I agree this won't
> be any problem functionality-wise. But it doesn't seem elegant to say
> "throw away the function but keep the static variable".
> So, if you want to add __init qualifier to this function, I suggest
> that
> you declare the static variable outside the function, and call
> register_pm_notifier() in the function, just to ensure it doesn't
> obscure
> things.
>
Rmoving __init cpu_hotplug_pm_sync_init() function after boot time and keep the static data defined in pm_notifier() is a normal behavior and normal usage in kernel. Same notifier registration usage function examples are ia64_mca_init() and msic_init() in mrst.c. There are quite a few other similar static data in __init functions usage examples in kernel source code.
So I would keep the same code in the patch.
I'll send an updated patch just to change the title typo.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists