From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [PATCH -next-20080709] fixup stop_machine use cpu mask vs ftrace Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:34:00 +1000 Message-ID: <200807112234.00993.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> References: <200807081756.47140.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20080711074602.GB27849@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:53897 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751671AbYGKMeP (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:34:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080711074602.GB27849@elte.hu> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Milton Miller , Ingo Molnar , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell , Andrew Morton On Friday 11 July 2008 17:46:03 Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Milton Miller wrote: > > Hi Rusty, Ingo. > > > > Rusty's patch [PATCH 3/3] stop_machine: use cpu mask rather than magic > > numbers didn't find kernel/trace/ftrace.c in -next, causing an > > immediate almost NULL pointer dereference in ftrace_dynamic_init. > > Rusty - what's going on here? Please do not change APIs like that, which > cause code to crash. Either do a compatible API change, or change it > over in a way that causes clear build failures, not crashes. To be fair, I did. Unfortunately GCC only warns about passing an int to a pointer arg, and boom. But compatible is even better. Given the number of stop_machine_run users I thought it unlikely that a new one would be introduced during the change. I was wrong, so I'll do it the Right Way. Cheers, Rusty.