From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934288AbXGQQro (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:47:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756912AbXGQQrd (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:47:33 -0400 Received: from pasmtpb.tele.dk ([80.160.77.98]:57628 "EHLO pasmtpB.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754978AbXGQQrc (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:47:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:48:46 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Takashi Iwai Cc: Domen Puncer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce __init_exit function annotation Message-ID: <20070717164846.GB26953@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20070717080248.GK4375@moe.telargo.com> <20070717130230.GB24780@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20070717151432.GA25939@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20070717153236.GB25939@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 05:40:15PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:32:36 +0200, > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 05:16:13PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > At Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:14:32 +0200, > > > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 04:52:12PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > > At Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:02:30 +0200, > > > > > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 10:02:48AM +0200, Domen Puncer wrote: > > > > > > > Introduce __init_exit, which is useful ie. for drivers that call > > > > > > > cleanup functions when they fail in __init functions. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is wrong. > > > > > > On arm (just one example of several) the __exit section are discarded > > > > > > at buildtime so any reference from __init to __exit will cause the > > > > > > linker to error out. > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, from what I see, it adds __init to the function. There is no > > > > > reference to __exit. > > > > > > > > The cleanup functions are marked __exit in the referenced case. > > > > > > My understanding is that it's the very purpose of this patch -- > > > change the mark from __exit to __init_exit for such clean-up > > > functions. > > > > And that is wrong. > > You misunderstood. What I meant is the case like this: > > static void __init_exit cleanup() > { > ... > } > > static void __init foo_init() > { > if (error) > cleanup(); > } > > static void __exit foo_exit() > { > cleanup(); > } > > Currently, there is no proper way to mark cleanup(). Neither __init, > __exit, __devinit nor __devexit can be used there. Then you get the annotation sorted out so cleanup() get discarded in the built-in case. But you leave no room for automated tools to detect this. If this is really necessary (and I daught) then a specific section should be dedicated for this usage. We have lot of issues with current __init/__exit, __devinit/__devexit, __cpuint/__cpuexit and introducing more of the kind does not help it. So even if it saves a few bytes in some odd cases the added complaxity is IMHO not worth it. Sam