linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Introduce mips_late_time

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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1012082217230.2653@localhost6.localdomain6>
Date:	Wed, 8 Dec 2010 22:21:04 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
cc:	David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
	Anoop P A <anoop.pa@...il.com>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce mips_late_time_init

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> Running everything from late_time_init() instead allows the use of kmalloc.
> X86 has the same issue with requiring kmalloc in time_init which is why
> they had moved everything to late_time_init.

It's more ioremap, but yeah.
 
> So the real question is, why can't we just move the call of time_init()
> in setup_kernel() to where late_time_init() is getting called from for
> all architectures, does anything rely on it getting called early?

That's a good question and I asked it myself already. I can't see a
real reason why something would need it early. Definitely worth to
try.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/