On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:49 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
<snip>
> > I guess for now, bringing those things into .text and .data when there's
> > doubt is a reasonable thing to do.
>
> It seems clear that this particular oops was caused by the xfs driver
> trying to register a cpu_notifier at a time when that notifier chain was
> expected to be completely idle.
>
> Instead of moving all this code and data out of the init sections,
> wouldn't it be better to fix the individual drivers (like xfs) so they
> won't try to use inaccessible notifier chains?
>
> For that matter, if lots of entries on the cpu_notifier chain are marked
> with __cpuinit, then shouldn't the chain header itself plus
> register_cpu_notifier and unregister_cpu_notifier be marked the same way?
Your suggestion is very valid, since the cpu_notifiers are called only
at init time, unless CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU is turned ON. Definitions of
__cpuinit and __cpuinitdata takes care of HOTPLUG config option.
XFS wants to register only for HOTPLUG_CPU case, and it do so by putting
the callback, register and unregister inside #ifdef HOTPLUG_CPU.
Note: I made the changes and tested, it works.
Andrew, Linus, Any comments ?
> Alan Stern
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- [email protected] | .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
