public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, akpm@osdl.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, herbert@13thfloor.at,
	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Assert notifier_block and notifier_call are not in init section
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:01:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1145991663.16539.8.camel@linuxchandra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604241945570.3701@g5.osdl.org>

On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:47 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, sekharan@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > 
> > 	Feel free to drop this patch if you think it is not needed.
> 
> It's incorrect.
> 
> The init section will be free'd, and as a result can be re-allocated to 
> other uses. Thus testing that data is not in the init-section makes no 
> sense.
>
> Testing for _code_ not being in the init section can be sensible, since 
> code never gets re-allocated (modulo module code, but that's never in the 
> init section). So checking the "notifier_call" part may be sensible, but 
> checking the notifier block data pointer definitely is not.

Two questions:
1) related to this patch: Do you want me to generate a patch that
asserts only notifier calls ?

2) Unrelated to this patch: If the _code_ section is never reallocated
or reused, what is the purpose of putting _code_ in the init section ?
Only to make sure that the init calls are called in order ?

Thanks

chandra
PS: I fixed my mailer to put my name. sorry about that.

> 
> Patches 1-2 applied.
> 
> 		Linus
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chandra Seetharaman               | Be careful what you choose....
              - sekharan@us.ibm.com   |      .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------



  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-04-25 19:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-25  2:35 [PATCH 0/3] Fix for the bug reported by Herbert on 2.6.17-rc2 sekharan
2006-04-25  2:35 ` [PATCH 1/3] Remove __devinitdata from notifier block definitions sekharan
2006-04-25  2:35 ` [PATCH 2/3] Remove __devinit and __cpuinit from notifier_call definitions sekharan
2006-04-25  2:35 ` [PATCH 3/3] Assert notifier_block and notifier_call are not in init section sekharan
2006-04-25  2:47   ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-25  2:50     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-25 19:01     ` Chandra Seetharaman [this message]
2006-04-25 19:16       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-25 20:26         ` Alan Stern
2006-04-25 20:38           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-25 20:54             ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-04-25 22:33         ` Chandra Seetharaman

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=1145991663.16539.8.camel@linuxchandra \
    --to=sekharan@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=herbert@13thfloor.at \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com \
    /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