From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965590Ab0COSFy (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:05:54 -0400 Received: from ns1.siteground211.com ([209.62.36.12]:36072 "EHLO serv01.siteground211.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965385Ab0COSFx (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:05:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:06:15 +0200 From: Felipe Balbi To: Michal Nazarewicz Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, David Brownell , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kyungmin Park Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] USB: composite: allow optional removal of __init and __exit tags Message-ID: <20100315180615.GC3857@gandalf> Reply-To: me@felipebalbi.com References: <94ae17705a23aec612042afcc34c44f993088eca.1268307147.git.mina86@mina86.com> <1865d3ee9a5ca4e41844577fff9e01e63427ed71.1268656947.git.mina86@mina86.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1865d3ee9a5ca4e41844577fff9e01e63427ed71.1268656947.git.mina86@mina86.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - serv01.siteground211.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - felipebalbi.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 01:48:18PM +0100, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: > The composite framework has been written using __init and __exit tags > to mark init and exit functions as such. This works with most of the > composite gadgets however some may need to call init/exit functions > during normal operations. One example is mass storage gadget which > needs to call exit functions. > > This patch allows gadgets to define USB_NO_INIT_SEGMENT or > USB_NO_EXIT_SEGMENT to remove the __init and __exit declarations > from composite framework. wouldn't it be the same as changing from __init to __devinit and __exit to __devexit ?? -- balbi