Re: [PATCH] ramoops: use module parameters instead of platform data if not available

[Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>]

Il 28/05/2011 12:05, Stevie Trujillo ha scritto:
> On Saturday 28 May 2011 11:01:12 you wrote:
>> From: Marco Stornelli<marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
>>
>> Use generic module parameters instead of platform data, if platform
>> data are not available. This limitation has been introduced with
>> commit c3b92ce9e75f6353104fc7f8e32fb9fdb2550ad0.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli<marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
>> CC: Kyungmin Park<kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
>> Reported-by: Stevie Trujillo<stevie.trujillo@gmail.com>
>
> Nice work, I think this will fix my problems :) I have some comments - not
> sure how many of them are sane.
>
> I think the indent is wrong (mixed tabs + spaces) in ramoops_init. Tried to
> fix it, but my email client just made it worse :p

Oops, my fault, I'll resend the patch.

>
> With this patch, ramoops_platform_data takes precedence over module
> parameters. Should it maybe be the other way?
>

I don't like the "user overwrite kernel configuration" pattern :) At the 
end, for archs with a device tree source it's possible to change the 
value there.

> I think you can just statically allocate ramoops_platform_data, since it's
> only 2x(unsigned long)? You will use one more long in .data, but less in
> .text?

If some other field it's added to the struct, we already use the right 
policy.

>
> Not related to the patch: Should the printks end with "\n"? If i do
> printk(KERN_ERR "a"); printk(KERN_ERR "b"); I get two lines, but with
> printk(KERN_ERR "a"); printk("b"); they end up on the same line. So if another
> driver did printk without KERN_ after ramoops, they would end up on same line?
>

I'll add the \n with a separate patch.

Marco