linux-kernel - Re: swiotlb: Add missing _

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]

Message-ID: <adasko1pjck.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:02:19 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: swiotlb: Add missing __init annotations

> > @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ static void swiotlb_print_info(unsigned long bytes)
> >   * Statically reserve bounce buffer space and initialize bounce buffer data
> >   * structures for the software IO TLB used to implement the DMA API.
> >   */
> > -void __init
> > +void __init __weak
> >  swiotlb_init_with_default_size(size_t default_size)
> 
> This change looks unrealted to __init annotation described in the 
> changelog. Was it intentional?

Yes, that was a thinko -- somehow while reading it I saw the __init
without __weak as being missing an annotation.  Should I resend a fixed
patch?

 - R.
--
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/