| To: | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 3/3] Assert notifier_block and notifier_call are not in init section |
| From: | Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:26:12 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx>, <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604251211510.3701@g5.osdl.org> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > 2) Unrelated to this patch: If the _code_ section is never reallocated > > or reused, what is the purpose of putting _code_ in the init section ? > > Only to make sure that the init calls are called in order ? > > No, the code section is re-used, it's just never re-used for any other > code (since we don't generate code on the fly). So if you pass in a > function pointer, you know that if it's in the init section, it means that > init-code that was discarded. What about loadable modules? Is their code never loaded into memory that used to be part of an init section? Alan Stern |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Corrupt filesystem in 2.6.16, xfs_repair finds no error, Michael Geiger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | xfs bug, Yonathan Dossow |
| Previous by Thread: | Corrupt filesystem in 2.6.16, xfs_repair finds no error, Michael Geiger |
| Next by Thread: | xfs bug, Yonathan Dossow |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |