On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 02:52:40PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 02:12:59PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > Technically you are the one who has to deal with problems in your
> > > > patches, not the people pointing at the problems.
> > >
> > > If you believe that my patch adds a new problem then please describe
> > > it clearly so that I can understand it.
> >
> > Description:
> > - there are already __cpuinit* annotations in the kernel
> > - on UP kernels supporting suspend/resume, such annotated code
> > currently gets freed after booting (and this works)
> > - with your patch applied, this code no longer gets freed
>
> ok, i've dropped this patch from x86.git for now:
>
> Subject: x86: force __cpuinit on for CONFIG_PM without HOTPLUG_CPU
> From: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> but longer-term, shouldnt these annotations be automated? We'll see a
> constant stream of them, all around the clock as people regularly get it
> wrong (because it's not intuitive).
Would be great to have them automated - just dunno how to do it.
Do you see a feasible way to do it?
Short term modpost etc. will be enhanced to be less dependent on the actual
configuration when performing the checks.
It should not matter if CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU is enabled or not when we check
the __cpuint annotations but this is how we see it today so far
too many faults slip through.
Sam
--
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/
