linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] ARM: oprofile: Move non-ARM code into separate init/exit

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:	Wed, 6 Oct 2010 16:49:21 +0200
From:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
CC:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@...il.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] ARM: oprofile: Move non-ARM code into separate
 init/exit

On 06.10.10 15:33:09, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 04.10.10 16:44:22, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > In preparation for moving the majority of this oprofile code into an
> > architecture-neutral place separate the architecture-independent code
> > into oprofile_perf_init() and oprofile_perf_exit().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
> > Tested-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/oprofile/common.c |   17 ++++++++++++++---
> >  1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/oprofile/common.c b/arch/arm/oprofile/common.c
> > index 86df75f..e4cd332 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/oprofile/common.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/oprofile/common.c
> > @@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ static void arm_backtrace(struct pt_regs * const regs, unsigned int depth)
> >  		tail = user_backtrace(tail);
> >  }
> >  
> > -int __init oprofile_arch_init(struct oprofile_operations *ops)
> > +int __init oprofile_perf_init(struct oprofile_operations *ops)
> >  {
> >  	int cpu, ret = 0;
> >  
> > @@ -365,7 +365,6 @@ int __init oprofile_arch_init(struct oprofile_operations *ops)
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	ops->backtrace		= arm_backtrace;
> >  	ops->create_files	= oprofile_perf_create_files;
> >  	ops->setup		= oprofile_perf_setup;
> >  	ops->start		= oprofile_perf_start;
> > @@ -388,7 +387,14 @@ out:
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > -void __exit oprofile_arch_exit(void)
> > +int __init oprofile_arch_init(struct oprofile_operations *ops)
> > +{
> 
> We should do here a:
> 
> 	memset(ops, 0, sizeof(*ops));

Matt,

an alternative would be to move this to oprofile_perf_init() and
modify ops->backtrace afterwards, but then we will lose the function's
tail call. Not sure that is better. Paul, what do you think?

-Robert

> 
> Otherwise it looks good.
> 
> -Robert
> 
> > +	ops->backtrace		= arm_backtrace;
> > +
> > +	return oprofile_perf_init(ops);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void __exit oprofile_perf_exit(void)
> >  {
> >  	int cpu, id;
> >  	struct perf_event *event;
> > @@ -406,6 +412,11 @@ void __exit oprofile_arch_exit(void)
> >  	kfree(counter_config);
> >  	exit_driverfs();
> >  }
> > +
> > +void __exit oprofile_arch_exit(void)
> > +{
> > +	oprofile_perf_exit();
> > +}
> >  #else
> >  int __init oprofile_arch_init(struct oprofile_operations *ops)
> >  {
> > -- 
> > 1.7.1

-- 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center

--
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/