linux-kernel - Re: sparc boot failure due to perf init

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:	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:33:26 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sparc boot failure due to perf init

On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 13:25 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -arch_initcall(pcr_arch_init);
> > > +early_initcall(pcr_arch_init);
> > 
> > 
> > I just realized, doesn't this make bootability depend on link order?
> Yes.
> 
> > Since both the pmu init and its dependencies are now early_initcall()
> > how do we guarantee pcr_arch_init() and cpu_type_probe() are in fact
> > called _before_ init_hw_perf_events()?
> 
> Today this is achieved by perf_event.o being located last
> in the Makefile in arch/sparc/kernel/
> 
> It deserves a comment..

Ah, right! and while make -j will compile concurrently, link order is
still maintained, and I guess until the linker decides to process its
input files in random order (or reverse order, or whatever) we're good.

Does something like GOLD which was supposed to be threaded or somesuch
still work as expected here?
--
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/