Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757095Ab0FDCAd (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 22:00:33 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:54267 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756821Ab0FDCAc (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 22:00:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 18:55:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Rusty Russell cc: Brandon Philips , Andrew Morton , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Jon Masters , Tejun Heo , Masami Hiramatsu , Kay Sievers Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] module: fix bne2 "gave up waiting for init of module libcrc32c" In-Reply-To: <201006041032.04323.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Message-ID: References: <201005252300.07739.rjw@sisk.pl> <201006031450.53576.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <201006041032.04323.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1523 Lines: 39 On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > 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. Ok. So if we don't expect to ever pass the full load_info struct down to the arch code, and we can keep it entirely internal to module.c, then "struct load_info" is fine by me. > If so, do you want just the fixes or the whole refactoring too, while > it's nice and fresh? Gaah. "Just the fixes" is definitely the prudent thing to do. At the same time, I've now so deeply bought into the whole cleanup thing too, that I want to argue that the cleanup might make it easier to handle any locking problems if we find them. But I suspect that is just myself trying to fool/argue my smarter half into taking it all. So you can probably push me either way. Linus -- 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/