On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:08:56 +0930 Rusty Russell <ru...@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> OTOH, if it's just ftrace (do tracepoints have an issue?) I'd rather > hardcode a ftrace_init_module() call in exactly the right place. > Notifiers which are sensitive to their exact call location tend give me > the creeps... I think I like this solution the best. I believe it was the original solution for ftrace until we realized that it can be also done by a notifier. It also makes it more in line with what the core kernel does, as I considered notifiers similar to initcalls and the init code for ftrace is hard coded in init/main.c and not done by initcalls, as it is important to be done before anything else. Yeah, a ftrace_init_module() hard coded in where the module state is still MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED, would work. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/