[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1710171358550.28731@san.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:00:40 +0200 (CEST)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
jpoimboe@...hat.com, jeyu@...nel.org, jikos@...nel.org,
pmladek@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] livepatch: use lists to manage patches, objects
and functions
> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/core.c b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> index b9628e4..b7f77be 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ static int klp_init_func(struct klp_object *obj, struct klp_func *func)
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&func->stack_node);
> func->patched = false;
> func->transition = false;
> + list_add(&func->func_entry, &obj->func_list);
I doubt it matters much, but would list_add_tail() be better? The order
would then be the same in both linked list and static array.
> /* The format for the sysfs directory is <function,sympos> where sympos
> * is the nth occurrence of this symbol in kallsyms for the patched
> @@ -689,7 +690,9 @@ static int klp_init_object(struct klp_patch *patch, struct klp_object *obj)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - klp_for_each_func(obj, func) {
> + list_add(&obj->obj_entry, &patch->obj_list);
Here as well.
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists