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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1302491 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-01-06 10:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> - 2016-01-06 15:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-01-06 16:10 +0100

#1302491 — Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper

On Mon 21-12-15 15:38:21, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
[...]
> ...use one of the non-modular initcalls here?   I'm trying to clean up most of
> the non-modular uses of modular macros etc. since:
> 
>  (1) it is easy to accidentally code up an unused module_exit function
>  (2) it can be misleading when reading the source, thinking it can be
>       modular when the Makefile and/or Kconfig prohibit it
>  (3) it requires the include of the module.h header file which in turn
>      includes nearly everything else, thus increasing CPP overhead.
> 
> I figured no point in sending a follow on patch since this came in via
> the akpm tree into next and that gets rebased/updated regularly.

Sorry for the late reply. I was mostly offline throughout the last 2
weeks last year. Is the following what you would like to see? If yes I
will fold it into the original patch.

Thanks!
---
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 7a9678c50edd..1ece40b94725 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
 #include <linux/ftrace.h>
 #include <linux/ratelimit.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
-#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
 
 #include <asm/tlb.h>
 #include "internal.h"
@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ static int __init oom_init(void)
 	}
 	return 0;
 }
-module_init(oom_init)
+subsys_initcall(oom_init)
 #else
 static void wake_oom_reaper(struct mm_struct *mm)
 {
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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] | [next] | [standalone]

#1302806

[Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper] On 06/01/2016 (Wed 10:10) Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Mon 21-12-15 15:38:21, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> [...]
> > ...use one of the non-modular initcalls here?   I'm trying to clean up most of
> > the non-modular uses of modular macros etc. since:
> > 
> >  (1) it is easy to accidentally code up an unused module_exit function
> >  (2) it can be misleading when reading the source, thinking it can be
> >       modular when the Makefile and/or Kconfig prohibit it
> >  (3) it requires the include of the module.h header file which in turn
> >      includes nearly everything else, thus increasing CPP overhead.
> > 
> > I figured no point in sending a follow on patch since this came in via
> > the akpm tree into next and that gets rebased/updated regularly.
> 
> Sorry for the late reply. I was mostly offline throughout the last 2
> weeks last year. Is the following what you would like to see? If yes I
> will fold it into the original patch.

Yes, that looks fine.  Do note that susbsys_initcall is earlier than the
module_init that you were using previously though.

Thanks,
Paul.
--

> 
> Thanks!
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 7a9678c50edd..1ece40b94725 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
>  #include <linux/ftrace.h>
>  #include <linux/ratelimit.h>
>  #include <linux/kthread.h>
> -#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/tlb.h>
>  #include "internal.h"
> @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ static int __init oom_init(void)
>  	}
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -module_init(oom_init)
> +subsys_initcall(oom_init)
>  #else
>  static void wake_oom_reaper(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  {
> -- 
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
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]

#1302831

On Wed 06-01-16 09:26:12, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> [Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper] On 06/01/2016 (Wed 10:10) Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > On Mon 21-12-15 15:38:21, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > [...]
> > > ...use one of the non-modular initcalls here?   I'm trying to clean up most of
> > > the non-modular uses of modular macros etc. since:
> > > 
> > >  (1) it is easy to accidentally code up an unused module_exit function
> > >  (2) it can be misleading when reading the source, thinking it can be
> > >       modular when the Makefile and/or Kconfig prohibit it
> > >  (3) it requires the include of the module.h header file which in turn
> > >      includes nearly everything else, thus increasing CPP overhead.
> > > 
> > > I figured no point in sending a follow on patch since this came in via
> > > the akpm tree into next and that gets rebased/updated regularly.
> > 
> > Sorry for the late reply. I was mostly offline throughout the last 2
> > weeks last year. Is the following what you would like to see? If yes I
> > will fold it into the original patch.
> 
> Yes, that looks fine.  Do note that susbsys_initcall is earlier than the
> module_init that you were using previously though.

Yes, I have noticed that but quite honestly module_init choice was just
"look around and use what others are doing". So there was no particular
reason to stick with that order.

Thanks for double checking after me!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web