Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1211779 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 14/18] ARM: sunxi: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 14/18] ARM: sunxi: use const and __initconst for  smp_operations Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-08-24 08:30 +0200
    [PATCH 06/18] ARM: berlin: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 03/18] ARM: alpine: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 18/18] ARM: mcpm: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 04/18] ARM: axxia: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 13/18] ARM: socfpga: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 11/18] ARM: qcom: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 11/18] ARM: qcom: use const and __initconst for  smp_operations Andy Gross <agross@codeaurora.org> - 2015-08-24 21:40 +0200
    [PATCH 12/18] ARM: rockchip: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 05/18] ARM: BCM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 05/18] ARM: BCM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 05/18] ARM: BCM: use const and __initconst for  smp_operations Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com> - 2015-08-24 22:30 +0200
    [PATCH 16/18] ARM: zx: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:40 +0200
    [PATCH 08/18] ARM: hisi: do not export smp_operations structures Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:50 +0200
    [PATCH 07/18] ARM: EXYNOS: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 07/18] ARM: EXYNOS: use const and __initconst for  smp_operations Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> - 2015-08-24 09:20 +0200
    [PATCH 02/18] ARM: add const qualifier to smp_operations member in structures Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:50 +0200
    [PATCH 09/18] ARM: hisi: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-24 06:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> - 2015-08-24 23:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> - 2015-08-24 23:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> - 2015-08-24 23:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH 00/18] ARM: use const and __initconst for smp_operations Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2015-08-25 03:40 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#1212514

On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
> Currently, SoC code can not add const qualifier to smp_operations
> structures although they are never over-written.
>
> 01/18 and 02/18 add small changes to the ARM core to fix that.
> The rest of this series replace "__initdata" with "const ... __initconst"
> for each of SoC code.
>
> I split this series into per-SoC so that each sub-arch maintainer
> can easily give their Acked-by.  (Is this better?)

When you split, chances are each sub-arch maintainer will apply
instead of ack. If that's what you want, that's fine.

> Russell, Olof, and Arnd:
>
> How should this series be applied (if it looks good)?
> The first two are ARM-tree wide and looks like in the field of Russell.
> The rest are highly SoC-related.

Easiest of all would probably be to get the sub-arch patches into one
release, then switch the prototypes and function definitions in the
next. If you switch prototypes first you'll get a bunch of warnings,
right?


-Olof
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1212527

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 02:12:06PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Easiest of all would probably be to get the sub-arch patches into one
> release, then switch the prototypes and function definitions in the
> next. If you switch prototypes first you'll get a bunch of warnings,
> right?

Wrong way around. :)

If you change the sub-arches to declare the smp operations as const,
and try and pass them into a function which doesn't take a const-pointer,
you'll get a warning.  The core bits need to go in first before the
sub-arch patches.

I think the series has limited value - it allows us to (a) check that a
small quantity of code doesn't write to these things, and (b) allows us
to move the SMP operations structure from __initdata to __initconstdata.
It's still going to end up in the init region which is read/write in any
case, and still gets thrown away.

Given where we are, I don't think we need to rush this in during the
last week before the merge window opens, even though it's trivial.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1212534

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 02:12:06PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> Easiest of all would probably be to get the sub-arch patches into one
>> release, then switch the prototypes and function definitions in the
>> next. If you switch prototypes first you'll get a bunch of warnings,
>> right?
>
> Wrong way around. :)
>
> If you change the sub-arches to declare the smp operations as const,
> and try and pass them into a function which doesn't take a const-pointer,
> you'll get a warning.  The core bits need to go in first before the
> sub-arch patches.

Ah yes, my bad.

> I think the series has limited value - it allows us to (a) check that a
> small quantity of code doesn't write to these things, and (b) allows us
> to move the SMP operations structure from __initdata to __initconstdata.
> It's still going to end up in the init region which is read/write in any
> case, and still gets thrown away.
>
> Given where we are, I don't think we need to rush this in during the
> last week before the merge window opens, even though it's trivial.

Agreed. So if you pick it up for 4.4, we'll get the rest for 4.5.


-Olof
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1212623

Hi Russell, Olof,

2015-08-25 6:44 GMT+09:00 Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 02:12:06PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>> Easiest of all would probably be to get the sub-arch patches into one
>>> release, then switch the prototypes and function definitions in the
>>> next. If you switch prototypes first you'll get a bunch of warnings,
>>> right?
>>
>> Wrong way around. :)
>>
>> If you change the sub-arches to declare the smp operations as const,
>> and try and pass them into a function which doesn't take a const-pointer,
>> you'll get a warning.  The core bits need to go in first before the
>> sub-arch patches.
>
> Ah yes, my bad.
>
>> I think the series has limited value - it allows us to (a) check that a
>> small quantity of code doesn't write to these things, and (b) allows us
>> to move the SMP operations structure from __initdata to __initconstdata.
>> It's still going to end up in the init region which is read/write in any
>> case, and still gets thrown away.
>>
>> Given where we are, I don't think we need to rush this in during the
>> last week before the merge window opens, even though it's trivial.
>
> Agreed. So if you pick it up for 4.4, we'll get the rest for 4.5.
>

OK.

I will put 01 and 02 to Russell's patch tracker
(after waiting for a bit more comments just in case).

I will do the rest later.





-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web