From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robert.richter@amd.com (Robert Richter) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 20:44:07 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 4/7] ARM: oprofile: Move non-ARM code into separate init/exit In-Reply-To: References: <74092b0d162aafc21e408033cec6146e227363b5.1286222593.git.matt@console-pimps.org> <20101006133309.GP13563@erda.amd.com> <20101006144921.GQ13563@erda.amd.com> <20101006145311.GA3754@linux-sh.org> <20101006145903.GR13563@erda.amd.com> Message-ID: <20101006184407.GY13563@erda.amd.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 06.10.10 14:23:17, Grant Likely wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/oprofile/oprof.c b/drivers/oprofile/oprof.c > >> index b336cd9..76d97a5 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/oprofile/oprof.c > >> +++ b/drivers/oprofile/oprof.c > >> @@ -252,6 +252,8 @@ static int __init oprofile_init(void) > >> ?{ > >> ? ? ? int err; > >> > >> + ? ? memset(&oprofile_ops, 0, sizeof(struct oprofile_operations)); > >> + > > > > Yes, this looks much better. Thanks Paul. > > oprofile_ops is allocated in bss and so is already zeroed. No need to > do it explicitly. Before oprofile_arch_init() it isn't necessarily needed, but we should definitely add it before oprofile_timer_init(). For code readability I would rather tend to let the first in too. -Robert -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center