Re: [PATCH 2/2] thermal: core: Move initialization after core initcall

[Amit Kucheria]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 10:12 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The generic netlink is initialized at subsys_initcall, so far after
> the thermal init routine and the thermal generic netlink family
> initialization.
>
> On Åome platforms, that leads to a memory corruption.
>
> The fix was sent to netdev@ to move the genetlink framework
> initialization at core_initcall.
>
> Move the thermal core initialization to postcore level which is very
> close to core level.
>
> Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> index c2e7d7aaa354..79551bb6cd4c 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
> @@ -1617,4 +1617,4 @@ static int __init thermal_init(void)
>         mutex_destroy(&poweroff_lock);
>         return result;
>  }
> -core_initcall(thermal_init);
> +postcore_initcall(thermal_init);

For posterity, we moved to core_initcall from fs_initcall since we had
removed netlink support from the thermal framework and we wanted to
initialise it as quickly as possible after cpufreq to allow early
mitigation possibility.

Given the addition of the new netlink-based API to thermal framework,
I think moving to postcore_initcall is an acceptable compromise.

Reviewed-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx>

> --
> 2.17.1
>