From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:16:55 +0000 (-0700)
Subject: [PATCH] s1d13xxxfb linkage fix
X-Git-Tag: v2.6.13-rc1~68^2~582^2~40
X-Git-Url: https://err.no/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=27f931dac93057bbae691f66a49b11ff2f483bee;p=linux-2.6

[PATCH] s1d13xxxfb linkage fix

s1d13xxxfb_remove() is referenced from s1d13xxxfb_probe(), which is marked
__devinit().  So s1d13xxxfb_remove() cannot be marked __devexit.

Does this all make sense?  Clearly the __devexit section will still be in
core when the __devinit code is run, if the driver was loaded as a module.

But I suppose that if the driver is statically linked, the __devexit section
might be dropped early in boot.  Still, we wouldn't drop __devexit prior to
initcall completion, at which point the __devinit code has all been run
anyway.

verdict: this code was legal and made sense.  Is this a generic problem, or an
arm-specific problem?

  UPD     include/linux/compile.h
  CC      init/version.o
  LD      init/built-in.o
  LD      .tmp_vmlinux1
`.exit.text' referenced in section `.init.text' of drivers/built-in.o: defined in discarded section `.exit.text' of drivers/built-in.o

Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
---

diff --git a/drivers/video/s1d13xxxfb.c b/drivers/video/s1d13xxxfb.c
index b637c389e4..789de13f46 100644
--- a/drivers/video/s1d13xxxfb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/s1d13xxxfb.c
@@ -493,7 +493,7 @@ s1d13xxxfb_fetch_hw_state(struct fb_info *info)
 }
 
 
-static int __devexit
+static int
 s1d13xxxfb_remove(struct device *dev)
 {
 	struct fb_info *info = dev_get_drvdata(dev);