Re: [PATCH] Oopses in apply_alternatives

Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Thu, 24 Apr 2003 13:12:10 +1000

In message <20030423213038.GA6389@vana.vc.cvut.cz> you write:
> Hi Rusty,
> I somehow missed apply_alternatives inclusion into the kernel, so
> I have no idea whether you are right person...
>
> It is not good idea to call apply_alternatives from module_finalize,
> as apply_alternatives is __init function... It spectaculary crashed

Smells of Torvaldism. I missed it too: you're right,
apply_alternatives should be marked

__init_or_module

instead.

Thanks!
Rusty.

> @@ -802,7 +802,7 @@
> APs have less capabilities than the boot processor are not handled.
>
> In this case boot with "noreplacement". */
> -void __init apply_alternatives(void *start, void *end)
> +void apply_alternatives(void *start, void *end)
> {
> struct alt_instr *a;
> int diff, i, k;

--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/