From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Amerigo Wang Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 05:48:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [Patch 4/4] module: trim exception table in module_free() Message-Id: <4A1CD41C.1000008@redhat.com> List-Id: References: <20090526083717.5050.32719.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <200905271151.28045.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <4A1CAF44.7000002@redhat.com> <200905271453.51914.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200905271453.51914.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Rusty Russell Cc: linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jdike@addtoit.com, mingo@elte.hu, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Rusty Russell wrote: > __ex_table ends up with two entries: > > Contents of section __ex_table: > 0000 0c000000 00000000 0e000000 00000000 ................ > 0010 10000000 0a000000 12000000 0a000000 ................ > > The first is for the __put_user in .text (extable_not_init()) and the second is > for the one in .init.text (init()). > > Depending on how the module gets allocated, the one referring to .init.text > may be first or last. > Hmm, I understand now. The problem is that we don't know which entries are for __init, and which are not... > (You can see here why we haven't fixed this: exceptions in __init in modules > are rare, perhaps non-existent). > Agreed. Is it possible to put extable for __init in a separate section? Thanks for your explanation!