[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9o0+qC+qrCBoWp=FLcVABYrO+Bcihu_oWWaGJ3XuthseA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 10:12:44 +0200
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
"# 3.4.x" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: initialize jump labels before setup_machine_fdt()
Hi Ard,
On 6/3/22, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
> The problem is that your original patch
You remain extremely unpleasant to communicate with. Can we keep
things on topic please?
> As far as I can tell, the early patching code on ARM does not rely on
> the early fixmap code. Did you try just moving jump_label_init()
> earlier in the function?
>
> Also, how did you test this change?
Just booting a few configs in QEMU. I don't have access to real
hardware right now unfortunately.
Let me give a try to just moving the jump_label_init() function alone.
That'd certainly make this patch a lot more basic, which would be a
good thing, and might assuage your well justified concerns that too
much boot order churn will break something subtle. I was just afraid
of complicated intermingling with the other stuff after I saw that
arm64 did things in the other order. But maybe that's silly.
I'll send a v2 if that works, and send an update here if it doesn't.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists