Re: Status of __cpuinit removal

[Ingo Molnar]

* Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> As some of you are probably aware, a decision to remove __cpuinit and
> variants was made, since the cost/complexity outweighs the amount of
> memory reclaim that it provides.  Details of that decision are at:
> 
> 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/20/589
> 
> It seems that the suggestion to do this was partly motivated by the
> fix in commit 5e427ec2 ("x86: Fix bit corruption at CPU resume time").
> It is a good example of the nasty type of bugs that can be created
> with improper use of the various types of __init prefixes.
> 
> I have created a patch queue against the latest linux-next tree (Jun20)
> that removes all the variants of __cpuinit and the asm __CPUINIT variants,
> and the surrounding infrastructure for section handling of it.  There
> are no Kconfig changes; this is complex enough.  We can independently
> revisit later whether keeping CPU_HOTPLUG makes sense or not.
> 
> I have done this in 33 commits.  I decided against a giant monolithic
> patch for several reasons:

[...]

>  scripts/mod/modpost.c                         | 52 ++++------------------
>  307 files changed, 895 insertions(+), 1036 deletions(-)

Cool, thanks Paul for addressing all this!

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/