Re: [PATCH] init/module: split CONFIG_CONSTRUCTORS to fix module gcov on UML

2021-01-20 Thread Peter Oberparleiter
On 20.01.2021 17:09, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 17:07 +0100, Peter Oberparleiter wrote: > >> Do you expect other users for these new config symbols? > > Probably not. > >> If not it seems >> to me that the goal of enabling module constructors for UML could also >> be achieved

Re: [PATCH] init/module: split CONFIG_CONSTRUCTORS to fix module gcov on UML

2021-01-20 Thread Johannes Berg
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 17:07 +0100, Peter Oberparleiter wrote: > Do you expect other users for these new config symbols? Probably not. > If not it seems > to me that the goal of enabling module constructors for UML could also > be achieved without introducing new config symbols. Yeah, true. >

Re: [PATCH] init/module: split CONFIG_CONSTRUCTORS to fix module gcov on UML

2021-01-20 Thread Peter Oberparleiter
On 19.01.2021 12:18, Johannes Berg wrote: > From: Johannes Berg > > On ARCH=um, loading a module doesn't result in its constructors > getting called, which breaks module gcov since the debugfs files > are never registered. On the other hand, in-kernel constructors > have already been called by

[PATCH] init/module: split CONFIG_CONSTRUCTORS to fix module gcov on UML

2021-01-19 Thread Johannes Berg
From: Johannes Berg On ARCH=um, loading a module doesn't result in its constructors getting called, which breaks module gcov since the debugfs files are never registered. On the other hand, in-kernel constructors have already been called by the dynamic linker, so we can't call them again. Get