From: matt@codeblueprint.co.uk (Matt Fleming)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: efistub: drop __init annotation from handle_kernel_image()
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 16:00:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160129160006.GD2611@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu9sE4oJrFmSK8sEjTrU8A7k53Hj1S1pTyCqyA5Gsba2Kw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 29 Jan, at 10:36:03AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 28 January 2016 at 23:58, Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Would it make more sense to #undef __init in one of the arm64 efistub
> > header files? I'm thinking of the case where some poor unsuspecting
> > developer writes a new function and marks it as __init, and we miss it
> > during review.
> >
>
> Yes, I can add it to efistub.h, and make sure it gets included in all the files
>
> Should we #undef it and #define it to a string that is easily grep'ed
> for, so it is easy to find the explanatory comment that goes along
> with it?
> E.g.,
>
> #define __init __init_not_supported_in_efi_stub
This would produce a compilation failure if someone tags something as
__init right? Looks fine to me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-29 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-28 11:07 [PATCH 0/3] arm efi minor fixes Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 11:07 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: efistub: drop __init annotation from handle_kernel_image() Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 15:56 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-28 22:58 ` Matt Fleming
2016-01-29 9:36 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-29 16:00 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2016-01-29 16:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-02 11:08 ` Matt Fleming
2016-02-02 11:09 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-03 15:19 ` Matt Fleming
2016-02-03 15:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 11:07 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: vmlinux.lds.S: handle .init.rodata.xxx and .init.bss sections Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 15:57 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-28 22:59 ` Matt Fleming
2016-01-28 11:07 ` [PATCH 3/3] efi: arm-init: use read-only early mappings Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 15:53 ` [PATCH 0/3] arm efi minor fixes Mark Rutland
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=20160129160006.GD2611@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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).