Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:53:26 -0400
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: timing of module MODULE_STATE_COMING notifier
Message-ID: <20150831125326.GH29756@redhat.com>
References: <20150831000642.GG29756@redhat.com> <87si70p7c9.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87si70p7c9.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1334
Lines: 36

Hi, Rusty -

Thanks for your response!

> [...]
> > That patch also moved the MODULE_STATE_COMING notifier call to
> > complete_formation(), which is relatively early to its former
> > do_init_module() call site.  It now precedes the parse_args(),
> > mod_sysfs_setup(), and trace_module_load() steps.
> 
> Yes, parse_args() can enter the module, so you really want it before
> then.

Understood.  (Perhaps mod_sysfs_setup() could sneak in ahead.)


> > Was the latter part of the change intended & necessary?  It is
> > negatively impacting systemtap, which was relying on
> > MODULE_STATE_COMING being called from a fairly complete module
> > state - just before the actual initializer function call.

> Notifiers suck for stuff like this :( Module state has many steps,
> so my preference has been to open-code explicit hooks.  [...]

You mean something like the trace_module_load()?  (We will probably
experiment with hooking into that tracepoint instead of the notifier.)
A more hard-coded one with an in-kernel callee probably wouldn't help
module-resident clients like us.


- FChE
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/