From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752328Ab3KANvk (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 09:51:40 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55310 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751552Ab3KANvi (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 09:51:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:52:47 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: David Long Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Rabin Vincent , "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" , Srikar Dronamraju , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] uprobes: allow arch-specific initialization Message-ID: <20131101135247.GA16509@redhat.com> References: <1381871068-27660-1-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <1381871068-27660-5-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <20131019164223.GB7837@redhat.com> <52672484.9010201@linaro.org> <20131028185818.GB12863@redhat.com> <5272A45B.20507@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5272A45B.20507@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/31, David Long wrote: > On 10/28/13 14:58, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> On 10/22, David Long wrote: >> I simply do not understand why uprobes.c uses module_init/module_exit, >> it can't be compiled as a module. > > I guess that makes sense, assuming it can never be made a module. I saw > you recent commit for this. > >> I think that module_exit/exit_uprobes should be killed, and module_init() >> should be turned into __initcall(). uprobes-arm.c can have another one. >> > > I will see if I can make this work. If this can't work, then we need the new hook (this patch). But in this case please update the changelog to explain the reason. > Right now the arch-specific > initialization call is done in the middle of the generic initialization > code, but I don't know that it *has* to be that way. I have some > concern too about getting the order right, since these are built from > different makefiles. Not sure I understand... But grep shows a lot of core_initcall()'s in arch/arm/ which do register_undef_hook(). And I guess you can use any initcall level. Oleg. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: oleg@redhat.com (Oleg Nesterov) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:52:47 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 04/13] uprobes: allow arch-specific initialization In-Reply-To: <5272A45B.20507@linaro.org> References: <1381871068-27660-1-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <1381871068-27660-5-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <20131019164223.GB7837@redhat.com> <52672484.9010201@linaro.org> <20131028185818.GB12863@redhat.com> <5272A45B.20507@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20131101135247.GA16509@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 10/31, David Long wrote: > On 10/28/13 14:58, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> On 10/22, David Long wrote: >> I simply do not understand why uprobes.c uses module_init/module_exit, >> it can't be compiled as a module. > > I guess that makes sense, assuming it can never be made a module. I saw > you recent commit for this. > >> I think that module_exit/exit_uprobes should be killed, and module_init() >> should be turned into __initcall(). uprobes-arm.c can have another one. >> > > I will see if I can make this work. If this can't work, then we need the new hook (this patch). But in this case please update the changelog to explain the reason. > Right now the arch-specific > initialization call is done in the middle of the generic initialization > code, but I don't know that it *has* to be that way. I have some > concern too about getting the order right, since these are built from > different makefiles. Not sure I understand... But grep shows a lot of core_initcall()'s in arch/arm/ which do register_undef_hook(). And I guess you can use any initcall level. Oleg.