From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: make module.c itself more explicitly non-modular
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:36:55 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mvxeitgg.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1440555155-11273-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> writes:
> The Kconfig currently controlling compilation of this code is:
>
> menuconfig MODULES
> bool "Enable loadable module support"
>
> ...meaning that it currently is not being built as a module by anyone.
> No surprise here, since modular support being a module would be an
> interesting chicken before the egg problem.
>
> Lets remove the use of module_init in this code so that when reading
> the file, there is less doubt that it is builtin-only.
>
> Since module_init translates to device_initcall in the non-modular
> case, the init ordering remains unchanged with this commit. However
> one could argue that fs_initcall makes more sense for proc stuff,
> and we can change the initcall order later and watch for fallout
> if so desired.
This patch is just weird; is this part of something larger you are
trying to do?
I would argue that module_init() should be the default; it implies
no dependencies on the initialization, and it's a common pattern.
Cheers,
Rusty.
> We can't of course delete the module.h include in this case since it
> is used all through the rest of the file.
>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
> ---
>
> [I was undecided as to whether we should do this in one step
> or two, i.e. instead just make the change to fs_initcall here
> and now, and so went with the more cautious/granular approach.]
>
> kernel/module.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index 8f051a106676..7750bdcb12fc 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -3947,7 +3947,7 @@ static int __init proc_modules_init(void)
> proc_create("modules", 0, NULL, &proc_modules_operations);
> return 0;
> }
> -module_init(proc_modules_init);
> +device_initcall(proc_modules_init);
> #endif
>
> /* Given an address, look for it in the module exception tables. */
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-26 4:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-26 2:12 [PATCH] kernel: make module.c itself more explicitly non-modular Paul Gortmaker
2015-08-26 4:06 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-08-26 13:41 ` Paul Gortmaker
2015-08-27 4:13 ` Rusty Russell
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=87mvxeitgg.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.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