Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756928Ab0FDBCI (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 21:02:08 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:42588 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756551Ab0FDBCG (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 21:02:06 -0400 From: Rusty Russell To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] module: fix bne2 "gave up waiting for init of module libcrc32c" Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:32:03 +0930 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.32-22-generic; KDE/4.4.2; i686; ; ) Cc: Brandon Philips , Andrew Morton , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Jon Masters , Tejun Heo , Masami Hiramatsu , Kay Sievers References: <201005252300.07739.rjw@sisk.pl> <201006031450.53576.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006041032.04323.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1872 Lines: 49 On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 01:54:19 am Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > However, you're right that it has potential. I'll rename module_info to > > load_info if you don't mind tho: contains more semantic punch IMHO. > > Umm. One problem is that you will almost certainly eventually want to > expose that to the architecture "fixup" routines (ie things like > module_frob_arch_sections(), arch_mod_section_prepend()), and at that > point "load_info" is a horribly bad structure name, since it would show > up in and thus be exported all over. > > At least call it "struct module_load_info". But yes, I do agree that the > "load" part is important. Looking at the arch code, it has the advantage that it's self-contained. They've been pleasantly undemanding from the core over the years; I think archs doing tricky things with elf prefer to parse the object themselves anyway. And I'm not sure they want to revisit it, either. So I don't think we'd win much from changing them. I'm wrong later, I'll prepend "module_" to the struct name as an internal change then hit them all. > I looked at that particularly when doing that whole > > mod = setup_module_info(&info); > if (IS_ERR(mod)) { > err = PTR_ERR(mod); > goto free_hdr; > } > > thing, because that made "mod" have _three_ totally different values > (error, before, after) when jumping out to the failure paths. Yep, it now is back to sanity. Let's see if today's linux-next is happy. If so, do you want just the fixes or the whole refactoring too, while it's nice and fresh? Thanks! Rusty. -- 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/