[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1287246199.16971.54.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:23:19 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] jump label: Fix module __init section race
On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 08:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 16:09 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > --- a/kernel/jump_label.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/jump_label.c
> > > @@ -168,7 +168,8 @@ void jump_label_update(unsigned long key, enum jump_label_type type)
> > > count = e_module->nr_entries;
> > > iter = e_module->table;
> > > while (count--) {
> > > - if (kernel_text_address(iter->code))
> > > + if (iter->key &&
> > > + kernel_text_address(iter->code))
> >
> > Peter, I know you hated this, but the alternative is either:
> >
> > if (iter->key &&
> > kernel_text_address(iter->code))
> >
> > or break 80 chars. All three seem bad (although I don't mind breaking
> > 80 chars for this). But I'll leave it for now.
>
> No, the proper alternative is to move the body of the iteration into a
> jump_label_update_entry() inline function ...
>
> Nobody is forcing you to start yet another iteration 4 indentations
> deep. We have functions for a reason.
Jason,
Could you send me another version of this patch with the second
iteration wrapped in a function.
Thanks,
-- Steve
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists