From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.9]:58337 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756896AbaJaJRs (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Oct 2014 05:17:48 -0400 Message-ID: <1414747065.1964.15.camel@x220> (sfid-20141031_101813_299922_E7D8D622) Subject: Re: iwlwifi: mvm: BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP? From: Paul Bolle To: Johannes Berg Cc: Valentin Rothberg , Emmanuel Grumbach , "John W. Linville" , Intel Linux Wireless , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:17:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1414746518.3014.18.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <1414744834.1964.7.camel@x220> (sfid-20141031_094119_721260_FECF8114) <1414745106.3014.17.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <1414746397.1964.13.camel@x220> (sfid-20141031_100713_493693_5EC4F5B9) <1414746518.3014.18.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 10:08 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 10:06 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote: > > Perhaps you could also look into somehow guarding the call of > > dev_coredumpm(), that this commit added, with checks for > > CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP. See, I had a quick look at all this and selecting > > WANT_DEV_COREDUMP might not be enough, because DISABLE_DEV_COREDUMP can > > still, well, disable DEV_COREDUMP. Or am I misreading the Kconfig > > symbols that regulate DEV_COREDUMP? > > No, you're correctly reading that. However, the devcoredump header file > provides simple functions in this case. That means there's some extra > work (allocating and filling the buffer just to free it immediately) but > it simplifies the code. I see. More than a quick look was required here. Thanks for explaining this! Paul Bolle