Re: [PATCH -next] drivers/net: Makefile, fix netconsole link order

[Lin Ming]

On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 12:10 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:43:32 +0800 Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 08:00 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_NETCONSOLE) += netconsole.o
> > > 
> > > It would be preferable to fix this with initcall ordering.  Perhaps by
> > > switching init_netconsole() to subsys_initcall.
> > 
> > subsys_initcall is defined as __define_initcall("4",fn,4).
> > In !MODULE case, device driver module_int() is defined as
> > __define_initcall("6",fn,6)
> 
> oop, yes, I am chronologically challenged.
> 
> > If we use subsys_initcall for init_netconsole, it will still be called
> > before network device driver is initialized.
> > 
> > How about late_initcall?
> > 
> > (Not tested yet)
> > 
> > >From 11f4f035e96ff430192d0a75552dd715acb5f3b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:36:10 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] drivers/net: Makefile, fix netconsole link order
> > 
> > Commit 88491d8(drivers/net: Kconfig & Makefile cleanup) causes a
> > regression that netconsole does not work if netconsole and network
> > device driver are build into kernel, because netconsole is linked before
> > network device driver.
> > 
> > Fixes it by switching init_netconsole() to late_initcall if it's
> > build-in.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/netconsole.c |    4 ++++
> >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/netconsole.c b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > index dfc8272..914be29 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > @@ -799,5 +799,9 @@ static void __exit cleanup_netconsole(void)
> >  	}
> >  }
> >  
> > +#ifdef MODULE
> >  module_init(init_netconsole);
> >  module_exit(cleanup_netconsole);
> > +#else
> > +late_initcall(init_netconsole);
> > +#endif /* !MODULE */
> 
> That should work, unless any net driver is weirdly also using
> late_initcall.  But if there are such drivers, they would have failed
> with the old Makefile ordering.

Yes.

BTW, may I get your ACK after testing this patch?

Thanks.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/