From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Statically initialize init_net.dev_base_head Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20120718.133243.1384365436939730847.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20120718.132010.1765790775051953381.davem@davemloft.net> <20120718202159.GA30706@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <50071D11.7080207@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nhorman@tuxdriver.com, mark.d.rustad@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, gaofeng@cn.fujitsu.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com To: john.r.fastabend@intel.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38068 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755896Ab2GRUco (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:32:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <50071D11.7080207@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: John Fastabend Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:31:13 -0700 > On 7/18/2012 1:21 PM, Neil Horman wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 01:20:10PM -0700, David Miller wrote: >>> From: Neil Horman >>> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:11:49 -0400 >>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:06:07PM -0700, Mark Rustad wrote: >>>>> This change eliminates an initialization-order hazard most >>>>> recently seen when netprio_cgroup is built into the kernel. >>>>> >>>>> With thanks to Eric Dumazet for catching a bug. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Rustad >>> ... >>>> I think dave was going to take John Fastabends patch from earlier >>>> today, but >>>> this works just as well. Long term I'm going to look into delaying >>>> initzlization for cgroups, as it creates a strange initialization >>>> state when you >>>> have a module_init routine registered. >>> >>> Neil, any particular preference between John's and Mark's version >>> of the fix? >>> >> I think they're both perfectly good. If I had to choose I'd say >> Marks, just >> because its done by initializing data, rather than adding more code to >> run every >> time we create a cgroup. >> >> Neil >> > > Fine by me if we take this version instead. I think that's what I'll do, sorry for all the trouble John :)