Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758265AbXLAABU (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:01:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758688AbXLAAAz (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:00:55 -0500 Received: from g4t0014.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.17]:9542 "EHLO g4t0014.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758563AbXLAAAy (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:00:54 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 489 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:00:54 EST From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Rene Herman Subject: Re: [PATCH] Declare PNP option parsing functions as __init Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 16:52:41 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: trenn@suse.de, linux-kernel , akpm , "Li, Shaohua" References: <1196442277.23251.318.camel@queen.suse.de> <47509EB6.20300@keyaccess.nl> In-Reply-To: <47509EB6.20300@keyaccess.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711301652.42110.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1650 Lines: 42 On Friday 30 November 2007 04:37:26 pm Rene Herman wrote: > On 30-11-07 18:04, Thomas Renninger wrote: > > If I have not overseen something, it should be rather obvious that those > > can all be declared __init... > > --------------- > > > > Declare PNP option parsing functions as __init > > > > There are three kind of parse functions provided by PNP acpi/bios: > > - get current resources > > - set resources > > - get possible resources > > The first two may be needed later at runtime. > > The possible resource settings should never change dynamically. > > And even if this would make any sense (I doubt it), the current implementation > > only parses possible resource settings at early init time: > > -> declare all the option parsing __init > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger > > Yes. Obviousness aside, > > (0) pnpacpi_add_device is only caller of > ... I agree this is probably safe in the current implementation. However, I think the current implementation is just broken because we can't really handle hotplug of ACPI devices. Specifically, I think the first TBD in acpi_bus_check_device() should be fleshed out so it does something like pnpacpi_add_device(). So my dissenting opinion is that this patch would just get reverted soon anyway when somebody finishes implementing ACPI hotplug, and therefore it's not worth doing. Bjorn - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/