Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH #repost] SCSI: megaraid, fix suspend/resume sections | From | James Bottomley <> | Date | Fri, 02 May 2008 09:56:10 -0500 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 15:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 01 May 2008 17:05:59 -0500 > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> 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@gmail.com> 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?
Well, IBM for one ... although you wouldn't have to try hard to convince me that they do it just to annoy me.
> > 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..."?)
Well, since the __dev.* sections according to the embedded folks are worth about a page possibly two, the __dev.* value to them is minimal (particularly as a lot of them have hotplug anyway for their compact flash, USB and the like).
> > in spite of the pain, > > What pain? Other people write the dang patches for you! Their main > problem is getting them merged.
No, the problem is getting them reviewed. Since everyone seems to have section mismatch fatigue they all seem to land on me.
> > 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.
Yes, the same way the exit sections are: as linker discards. We also have the mechanics for runtime discards which is useful for modules
> b) worth investigating. It might lead to lengthy chains of compilation > warnings though.
Yes ... but if it was worth the effort to unify all the handrolled CONFIG_HOTPLUG stuff, it should be worth it for all the handrolled CONFIG_PM code.
James
| |