linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] get rid if __cpuinit and _

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:07:37 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] get rid if __cpuinit and __cpuexit

On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:12:14 -0700
"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Arjan van de Ven
> <arjan@...radead.org> wrote:
> > as discussed briefly at the kernel summit; __cpuinit and __cpuexit
> > are causing a ton more complexity than they're worth (just see how
> > many section warnings an average build has);
> 
> Nice idea ... but on ia64 I actually see *more* section mismatch
> warnings with this patch applied :-(
> 
> generic_defconfig goes up from 6 to 7
> tiger_defconfig rises from 3 to 6

interesting... I don't see how that can be unless the checks originally
had a bug and did not complain about a reference to __init(data) memory
from inside __cpuinit memory...
(in which case my point of this being too complex and fragile is
proven ;-)


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/