From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][CFT][CFReview] execve and kernel_thread unification work
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 11:16:33 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121012001633.GA29883@bloggs.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121011125306.GF2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 01:53:06PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> Umm... Maybe, but let's do that as subsequent cleanup. Again,
> we almost certainly don't need to mess with TOC at all - the callbacks
> are in the main kernel, there are very few of them and they really are
> low-level details of exported mechanisms (i.e. kthread_create/run/etc.
> in kthread.h and call_usermode... in kmod.h). Again, we are talking
> about out-of-tree modules, they had better mechanism for at least
> 6 years and conversion to it is bloody trivial. Hell, it was even
> in late unlamented feature-removal-schedule.txt - since 2006. If that's
> not enough to retire an export, what is?
OK... yes we can fix things up in a subsequent cleanup.
We will need to fix the TOC handling when we go to using multiple TOCs
in the main kernel, with the linker managing the transitions between
TOCs. Our toolchain guys have been pushing us to do that for years,
because it should make things run faster, but first we'll have to stop
using ld -r to combine objects in subdirectories.
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-12 0:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-01 21:38 [RFC][CFT][CFReview] execve and kernel_thread unification work Al Viro
2012-10-05 16:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2012-10-06 16:19 ` Al Viro
2012-10-09 19:48 ` Chris Metcalf
2012-10-10 4:51 ` Al Viro
2012-10-11 9:00 ` Paul Mackerras
2012-10-11 12:53 ` Al Viro
2012-10-12 0:16 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2012-10-12 1:09 ` [git pull] signal.git, pile 2 (was Re: [RFC][CFT][CFReview] execve and kernel_thread unification work) Al Viro
2012-10-12 5:32 ` Paul Mackerras
2012-10-12 7:55 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-10-15 1:30 ` [RFC][CFT][CFReview] execve and kernel_thread unification work Al Viro
2012-10-17 6:16 ` Greg Ungerer
2012-10-17 14:02 ` Catalin Marinas
2012-10-17 16:34 ` Al Viro
2012-10-17 16:40 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121012001633.GA29883@bloggs.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).