On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 01:21:33PM -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> >
> > The problem we ran into was some of the startup code depends on the notifier
> > call chain for smp bringup, hence we couldn't nuke it similar to
> > hotcpu_notifier().
>
> I do not understand the problem. If everybody that uses
> register_cpu_notifier() starts using __cpuinit and __cpuinitdata (or the
> devinit siblings), then the notifier mechanism will not be any different
> than what they are now, right ? (both in hotplug cpu and non-hotplug cpu
> case) Or am i missing something ?
Well, register_cpu_notifier() is an exported function. There are several
modules that use this today like cpufreq etc which disqualifies it to be
a init style function.
either that function should be devinit and be present premanently, or
should be mapped to null macro for correctness.
Otherwise module loaders will start to oops when they call into
register.
--
Cheers,
Ashok Raj
- Open Source Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
