[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1294922006.19601.106.camel@laptop>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists