Re: PCI Section mismatch error in linux-next.

[Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>]

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Thierry Reding
<thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:48:39PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 02:39:34PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [...]
>> > Well, maybe you just need to turn on CONFIG_HOTPLUG.  How would that
>> > affect you?  I think we would still have to change some __inits to
>> > __devinit, including pcibios_update_irq(), but it might be more
>> > manageable.
>>
>> You said that depending on HOTPLUG wouldn't be enough because it would
>> exclude reenumeration at runtime if HOTPLUG wasn't defined. Also it is
>> theoretically possible to build a kernel without HOTPLUG but have the
>> enumeration start after init because of deferred probing. Those cases
>> won't work if we keep __init or __devinit respectively, right?
>
> Another possibility would be to make PCI select HOTPLUG or depend on it.
> That way it would be made sure that __devinit wouldn't cause all the
> functions to be discarded after init.

There's been some discussion recently about whether CONFIG_HOTPLUG is
worth keeping any more, but nothing's been resolved yet.  If we did
decide to remove CONFIG_HOTPLUG, or require it for PCI, I would rather
just remove all the __devinit annotations because they'd be
superfluous.

> Also, using PCI without HOTPLUG is sort of contradictory.

I'm not sure I follow this one.  I can easily imagine embedded systems
that use PCI internally but have no slots or connectors, so there's no
possibility of anything changing.