Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:00:03 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To:     Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@samsung.com>,
        "mcgrof@kernel.org" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc:     "rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "senozhatsky@chromium.org" <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        "andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com" 
        <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com" <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
        "wedsonaf@google.com" <wedsonaf@google.com>,
        "boqun.feng@gmail.com" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        "christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu" <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        "swboyd@chromium.org" <swboyd@chromium.org>,
        "ojeda@kernel.org" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        "ast@kernel.org" <ast@kernel.org>,
        "gary@garyguo.net" <gary@garyguo.net>,
        "mbenes@suse.cz" <mbenes@suse.cz>,
        "ndesaulniers@google.com" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        "void@manifault.com" <void@manifault.com>,
        "jolsa@kernel.org" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vaneet Narang <v.narang@samsung.com>,
        Onkarnath <onkarnath.1@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kallsyms: add kallsyms_show_value definition in all
 cases
Message-ID: <Yl/ns04PGU8ahIKJ@alley>
References: <YlaWxh5qYCe40US7@alley>
 <20220413055305.1768223-1-maninder1.s@samsung.com>
 <CGME20220413055318epcas5p3df3cdde54a559d4002a74de9f23289f2@epcms5p5>
 <747830777.1512786.1650256482294@mail-kr5-3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <747830777.1512786.1650256482294@mail-kr5-3>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon 2022-04-18 10:04:42, Maninder Singh wrote:
> > It is really weird that the function is declared in kallsyms.h
> > and implemented in vsprintf.c.
> >
> 
> Yes it does not look good.
> Initially we thought to make it as static inline function in kallsyms.h only.
> But as function is little big and it will increase code size, so we added
> definition in vsprintf.c, because its alwyas compilable code and also it has
> some wrapper APIs for kallsyms.
>  
> But as you suggested to make a new file, it will be good.
> 
> > What about splitting kallsyms.c into two source files where one
> > would be always compiled? It would be usable also for the
> > spring function introduced by
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220323164742.2984281-1-maninder1.s@samsung.com
> > 
> > It might be something like kallsyms_full.c and/or kallsyms_tiny.c.
> >
> 
> This patch is not taken by Luis yet in module-tetsing branch.
> So what will be the best approach to make new version of this patch ?

I am not sure about Luis' plans and if the patch applies on top of
the current module.c split patchset (linux-next).


> A) to make new file kallsyms_tiny.c and add only one definition in that file
> and when above patch of spring functions is merged in next we can move definitions
> to new file
>
> or
> 
> B) we send patch to Luis's branch of module-testing with moving definition(of earlier patch)
> to new file and current patch also.

I wonder how many conflicts it might cause. The patchset splitting
module.c actually does not touch kernel/kallsyms.c.

Anyway, I would probably prepare it on top of linux-next.

Best Regards,
Petr