linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/19] OpenRISC: Module support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <874o3f8p54.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:36:31 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>
Cc:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/19] OpenRISC: Module support

On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:05:31 +0200, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Friday 24 June 2011, Jonas Bonn wrote:
> > I noticed that kernel/module.c already has this:
> > 
> > unsigned int __weak arch_mod_section_prepend(struct module *mod,
> >                                              unsigned int section)
> > 
> >
> > Is using a __weak attribute on the default (generic) implementations a
> > better approach?
> 
> I normally don't like using __weak, because it more easily confuses
> readers about which version is actually used.

I share your reluctance with __weak, but as fewer people want to touch
multiple archs it is becoming the norm.

Would happily accept patches...

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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/