linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] uprobes: allow arch-specific initialization

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:	Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:41:31 -0400
From:	David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
	"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] uprobes: allow arch-specific initialization

On 10/28/13 14:58, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/22, David Long wrote:
> I simply do not understand why uprobes.c uses module_init/module_exit,
> it can't be compiled as a module.

I guess that makes sense, assuming it can never be made a module.  I saw 
you recent commit for this.

> I think that module_exit/exit_uprobes should be killed, and module_init()
> should be turned into __initcall(). uprobes-arm.c can have another one.
>

I will see if I can make this work.  Right now the arch-specific 
initialization call is done in the middle of the generic initialization 
code, but I don't know that it *has* to be that way.  I have some 
concern too about getting the order right, since these are built from 
different makefiles.

-dl

--
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/