Re: [PATCH] hwmon coretemp: Remove bogus __cpuinitdata etc cleanup

Previous thread: [PATCH 5 of 5 resend ] /drivers/char/watchdog ioremap balancing/ returncode check by Scott Thompson on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 11:33 pm. (1 message)

Next thread: Ideas on column length in kernel "problem"? by Scott Thompson on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 11:54 pm. (11 messages)
To: Rudolf Marek <r.marek@...>
Cc: Mark Hoffman <mhoffman@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 11:44 pm

The CPU hotplug notifier_block coretemp_cpu_notifier is already defined
inside an #ifdef HOTPLUG_CPU, therefore marking it as __cpuinitdata is
quite a pointless thing to do.

Also, remove duplicate prototype of function coretemp_update_device()
at the top of this file (another one already exists barely 10 lines
above this one :-)

Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>

---

[ Rudolf, Mark, would it be acceptable to you to remove all the open
#ifdef HOTPLUG_CPU from this file and replace them with __cpuinit{data}
instead? That could increase size of modular builds, but would remain
consistent with rest of kernel, and make the file #ifdef-clean ... ]

drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c | 4 +---
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
index 7c17952..f7b0ef4 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
@@ -58,8 +58,6 @@ struct coretemp_data {
u8 alarm;
};

-static struct coretemp_data *coretemp_update_device(struct device *dev);
-
/*
* Sysfs stuff
*/
@@ -350,7 +348,7 @@ static int coretemp_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
return NOTIFY_OK;
}

-static struct notifier_block __cpuinitdata coretemp_cpu_notifier = {
+static struct notifier_block coretemp_cpu_notifier = {
.notifier_call = coretemp_cpu_callback,
};
#endif /* !CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU */
-

To: Satyam Sharma <satyam@...>
Cc: Rudolf Marek <r.marek@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Sunday, September 2, 2007 - 11:41 am

Hi Satyam:

I am not automatically repulsed by #ifdefs as some are, and in this case the
usage is pretty clear and easy to read (not to mention useful).

--
Mark M. Hoffman
mhoffman@lightlink.com

-

To: Satyam Sharma <satyam@...>
Cc: Mark M. Hoffman <mhoffman@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Sunday, September 2, 2007 - 2:34 pm

Well I dont have any strong preference. I agree with Mark that that #ifdef is
easy to read.

Rudolf
-

To: Satyam Sharma <satyam@...>
Cc: Mark Hoffman <mhoffman@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Friday, August 24, 2007 - 5:22 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Good catch. Thanks for the fixes.

Acked-by: Rudolf Marek <r.marek@assembler.cz>

Rudolf
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGz0wO3J9wPJqZRNURAnerAKDiDMzqqvymSbvVuVzuvA+dkF8p8gCdGyq7
spqOnJ6YD8NxNgTNSBW8okY=
=/u3Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-

Previous thread: [PATCH 5 of 5 resend ] /drivers/char/watchdog ioremap balancing/ returncode check by Scott Thompson on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 11:33 pm. (1 message)

Next thread: Ideas on column length in kernel "problem"? by Scott Thompson on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 11:54 pm. (11 messages)