linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] move omap_udc's probe function to .devinit.text

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:10:34 +0200
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
Cc:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Philipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] move omap_udc's probe function to .devinit.text

Hello David,

On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 03:21:30PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 12 July 2009, Russell King wrote:
> > 	 David's approach is an enhancement whereas your patches
> > are a bug fix.
> 
> Not an enhancement.  Uwe's current approach causes regressions
> in terms of kernel runtime footprint.  That is, pages will newly
> be made to sit around doing *nothing* forever, when they could
> have been used to get Real Work done.  And, pre-patches, they
> would have been getting Real Work done.
> 
> If it weren't a regression I wouldn't have objected.
IMHO my patches primarily fix possible oopses.  I see your point that
platform_driver_probe has some advantages, but I consider it too
time-consuming to check for each of the initially 60+ patches when the
respecting devices are registered.

My intention is to point out a problem plus provide a safe fix.

> All that adds up.  There's no point to commiting patches that
> do things wrong *and* waste space, then need to fix things up
> again later when it's easy to do it right in the first place.

Obviously it's arguable if it's wrong or not.  I consider it at least
better than doing nothing.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                              | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                    | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
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/