[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <w2ertcizgmtu27kcike3lpw5dvhvqi2b4c6amqzwdfs2xtebfy@itrpen3oblhs>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 10:40:20 +0200
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: webgeek1234@...il.com
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kw@...ux.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] PCI: tegra: Allow building as a module
On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:25:54PM -0500, Aaron Kling via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@...il.com>
>
> This changes the module macro back to builtin, which does not define an
> exit function. This will prevent the module from being unloaded. There
> are concerns with modules not cleaning up IRQs on unload, thus this
> needs specifically disallowed. The remove callback is also dropped as it
> is unused.
What exactly are these concerns? I haven't done this lately, but I'm
pretty sure that unbinding the PCI controller is something that I
extensively tested back when this code was introduced. PCI is designed
to be hot-pluggable, so there shouldn't be a need to prevent unloading
of the controller.
Rather than just forcing this to be always there, can we not fix any
issues and keep this unloadable?
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists