[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160614153143.5fcc2d3ff6dcfc4a04e6171b@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:31:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] init, fix initcall blacklist for modules
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 05:59:46 -0400 Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 06/13/2016 04:59 PM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13 2016, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry ... forgot to cc everyone on the last email.
> >>
> >> P.
> >>
> >> ----8<----
> >>
> >> sprint_symbol_no_offset() returns the string "function_name [module_name]"
> >> where [module_name] is not printed for built in kernel functions. This
> >> means that the initcall blacklisting code will now always fail when
> >
> > I was and am pretty sure that %pf ends up using
> > sprint_symbol_no_offset(), so I don't see how this is new. But maybe
> > "now" doesn't refer to c8cdd2be21?
>
> Oops. I can see how you read that that way. No, this isn't caused by or
> "Fixes:" c8cdd2be21. At some point "%pF" changed its behavior and blacklisting
> module_init() functions stopped working.
Well can we please have a v2 with a complete changelog which identifies
when the regression occurred? That will help in deciding which kernel
versions need fixing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists