[Ksummit-2012-discuss] Topic proposal: Finding and eliminating kernel work creation schemes

Balbir Singh bsingharora at gmail.com
Sat Jun 16 13:23:06 UTC 2012

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley at hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
> I'm sure everyone has a different idea of what is and isn't work
> creation within the kernel; for instance some see value in pr_...
> replacement for printk(KERN_...).  However if we discuss our pet peeves
> in this department, perhaps we can find some of the ones that everyone
> agrees serve no useful purpose.  I'll start with mine:
> Although __init and __exit are fine and reasonably well contained, the
> massive proliferation of __dev... _mem... __cpu... and their ilk are
> getting out of control.  Plus, the amount of memory they save is tiny (a
> few pages at best) and finally virtually no-one compiles without
> CONFIG_HOTPLUG, so they're mostly nops anyway.  However, for that very
> case, we've evolved a massive set of tools to beat ourselves up whenever
> we violate the rules of using these tags.  What I'd like to explore is
> firstly, can we just eliminate CONFIG_HOTPLUG and make it always y (this
> will clear up the problem nicely) or, failing that, can we just dump the
> tags and the tools and stop causing work for something no-one cares
> about.

Do you expect CONFIG_HOTPLUG to be true even for embedded devices? Android, etc?


More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list