Re: [00/11] pr_debug during module initialization
From: Rusty Russell
Date: Sun Mar 18 2012 - 22:58:46 EST
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:01:55 -0600, jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> This is 3rd revision of the dyndbg modinit patches, previously sent
> Dec 11. Patches 1-17/25 sent then were added to driver-core-next,
> this set reworks the remainder.
>
> It implements the "fake" module param approach proposed by
> Thomas Renninger, back in https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/15/397
>
> This set is on top of linux-next, since that includes Pawel Moll's
> initcall-level params patch. Im not using this feature, but I didnt
> know that when I started.
>
> Rusty Russell did a partial review of 2nd rev (sent off-list), here:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1262934
> This revision incorporates my understanding of his feedback.
The module parts seem fine. The re-parsing of the commandline seems
weird: I'd really rather see something in unknown_bootoption(), like:
/* Unused module parameter. */
if (strchr(param, '.') && (!val || strchr(param, '.') < val)) {
+ /* Check for <module>.dyndebug fake param */
+ dyndebug_parse(param, val);
return 0;
}
(Note that param will be the whole line here, eg "foo.dyndebug=+p", with
val pointing just past the "=" (if any)).
Of course, that means the parsing happens at that "parse_args("Booting
kernel"...)" point in init/main.c, which may not suit.
Otherwise, all looks good!
Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
How could I marry someone with more hair than me? http://baldalex.org
--
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/