From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] init/main.c: Simplify initcall_blacklisted()
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 05:49:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54BE32D2.90301@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y4oyb6sc.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
On 01/19/2015 08:05 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>> On 01/17, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>>>
>>> Using kasprintf to get the function name makes us look up the name
>>> twice, along with all the vsnprintf overhead of parsing the format
>>> string etc. It also means there is an allocation failure case to deal
>>> with. Since symbol_string in vsprintf.c would anyway allocate an array
>>> of size KSYM_SYMBOL_LEN on the stack, that might as well be done up
>>> here.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>> I don't know how expensive it is to do the symbol lookup for each
>>> initcall. It might be worthwhile adding an
>>>
>>> if (list_empty(&blacklisted_initcalls))
>>> return false;
>>>
>>> at the very beginning of initcall_blacklisted(), since this is a debug
>>> feature and the blacklist is indeed usually empty.
>>
>> If we want to optimize this... I am wondering if we can change
>> initcall_blacklist()
>>
>> - entry->buf = alloc_bootmem(strlen(str_entry) + 1);
>> + ebtry->fn = kallsyms_lookup_name(str_entry);
>>
>> and then change initcall_blacklisted() to just compare the pointers.
>
> That would make far, far more sense. It would fail for modules of
> course, but that might be OK. Prarit, this was your code; does it
> matter?
It does actually matter to me. I've been using it to blacklist modules at boot
as well ... and it works really well :) So I'm okay with the original patch but
not the second suggested change.
P.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-20 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-17 0:25 [RFC/PATCH] init/main.c: Simplify initcall_blacklisted() Rasmus Villemoes
2015-01-19 19:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 1:05 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-20 10:49 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2015-01-20 18:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 18:39 ` Prarit Bhargava
2016-03-21 23:14 ` [PATCH resend] " Rasmus Villemoes
2016-03-22 3:27 ` Rusty Russell
2016-03-23 23:54 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2016-03-24 17:16 ` Prarit Bhargava
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=54BE32D2.90301@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fabf@skynet.be \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).