Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1506606 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-22 23:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-10-24 11:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 0/5] reset: make non-modular drivers really non modular Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> - 2016-10-22 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/5] reset: make non-modular drivers really non modular Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> - 2016-10-24 11:00 +0200
| From | Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-22 23:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] reset: make non-modular drivers really non modular |
| Message-ID | <svckV-nS-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[[PATCH 0/5] reset: make non-modular drivers really non modular] On 13/06/2016 (Mon 14:03) Paul Gortmaker wrote: > For anyone new to the underlying goal of this cleanup, we are trying to > not use module support for code that can never be built as a module since: Hi Philipp, I sent this several months ago, and aside from a couple Ack'd by, there was no negative feedback or similar. Since then there have been two more drivers added with the same issue. reset-make-ath79-explicitly-non-modular.patch reset-pistachio-make-it-explicitly-non-modular.patch Should I assume that the original send has fallen through the cracks and resend with the two new patches, or do you still have the original five in a queue somewhere? I'd like to merge as many of these as I can via their respective maintainers vs. trying to send them to Linus directly. Thanks, Paul. -- > > (1) it is easy to accidentally write unused module_exit and remove code > (2) it can be misleading when reading the source, thinking it can be > modular when the Makefile and/or Kconfig prohibit it > (3) it requires the include of the module.h header file which in turn > includes nearly everything else, thus adding to CPP overhead. > (4) it gets copied/replicated into other code and spreads like weeds. > > Fortunately the reset dir is in pretty good shape, and there are only > five instances of non-modular code using modular funcionality/macros. > > Changes seen here cover the following categories: > > -just replacement of modular macros with their non-modular > equivalents that CPP would have inserted anyway > > -the removal of including module.h ; replaced with init.h > as required based on whether the file already had it. > > -the removal of any ".remove" functions that were hooked into > the driver struct. This ".remove" function would of > course not be called from the __exit function since that was > never run. However in theory, someone could have triggered it > via sysfs unbind, even though there isn't a sensible use case > for doing so. So to cover that possibility, we've also disabled > sysfs unbind in the driver. > > Recently several of these drivers got removal of the ".remove" fcns > via other changes, so only one remains for which that happens here. > > There are no initcall level changes here; everything was at the level > of device_initcall and remains so, by using the builtin equivalents. > > Build tested for several different key arch on a recent linux-next > tree to ensure no silly typos crept in. > > If there is a desire for any of these to be modular, we can definitely > consider that, but by default the changes here keep the code consistent > with existing behaviour and do not expand functionality into the modular > realm that I can't run time test. > > Paul. > > --- > > Cc: Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> > Cc: Joachim Eastwood <manabian@gmail.com> > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > Cc: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com> > Cc: Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@ettus.com> > Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> > Cc: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> > Cc: "Sören Brinkmann" <soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com> > Cc: Steffen Trumtrar <s.trumtrar@pengutronix.de> > > > Paul Gortmaker (5): > reset: berlin: make it explicitly non-modular > reset: socfpga: make it explicitly non-modular > reset: sunxi: make it explicitly non-modular > reset: zynq: make it explicitly non-modular > reset: lpc18xx: make it explicitly non-modular > > drivers/reset/reset-berlin.c | 12 ++++-------- > drivers/reset/reset-lpc18xx.c | 32 +++++--------------------------- > drivers/reset/reset-socfpga.c | 10 ++++------ > drivers/reset/reset-sunxi.c | 9 ++------- > drivers/reset/reset-zynq.c | 10 ++++------ > 5 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.8.4 >
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-24 11:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <svJgR-5dT-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1506606 |
Hi Paul, Am Samstag, den 22.10.2016, 17:48 -0400 schrieb Paul Gortmaker: > [[PATCH 0/5] reset: make non-modular drivers really non modular] On 13/06/2016 (Mon 14:03) Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > > For anyone new to the underlying goal of this cleanup, we are trying to > > not use module support for code that can never be built as a module since: > > Hi Philipp, > > I sent this several months ago, and aside from a couple Ack'd by, there > was no negative feedback or similar. > > Since then there have been two more drivers added with the same issue. > > reset-make-ath79-explicitly-non-modular.patch > reset-pistachio-make-it-explicitly-non-modular.patch > > Should I assume that the original send has fallen through the cracks and > resend with the two new patches, or do you still have the original five > in a queue somewhere? thanks for the reminder. I had them stashed away because I wanted to see whether the introduction of per-driver Kconfig options would change some of them to become modular. That wasn't the case, so I have pushed your patches to the reset/next branch now, with fixed up commit messages. > I'd like to merge as many of these as I can via their respective > maintainers vs. trying to send them to Linus directly. > > Thanks, > Paul. regards Philipp
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web