Re: [tip:x86/debug] x86/EFI: Properly init-annotate BGRT code

[Ingo Molnar]

* Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 07:45:42AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 24.01.13 at 23:28, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:34:21PM -0800, tip-bot for Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> Commit-ID:  13f0e4d2b9e2209f13d5a4122478eb79e6136870
> > >> Gitweb:     
> > > http://git.kernel.org/tip/13f0e4d2b9e2209f13d5a4122478eb79e6136870 
> > >> Author:     Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > >> AuthorDate: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:30:07 +0000
> > >> Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> CommitDate: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:12:18 +0100
> > >> 
> > >> x86/EFI: Properly init-annotate BGRT code
> > >> 
> > >> These items are only ever referenced from initialization code.
> > > 
> > > Not true, and this patch will break the BGRT code.  bgrt_init, which
> > > does indeed have an __init annotation, stores bgrt_image and
> > > bgrt_image_size into the .private and .size fields of a sysfs
> > > bin_attribute, which does *not* have an __initdata annotation, and which
> > > will get read whenever the user reads the corresponding sysfs attribute.
> > 
> > Copying init-only data into a sysfs structure is no problem at all
> > - that structure obviously is non-__initdata and hence can be
> > read at any time. It was a different thing if .private and/or .size
> > stored _pointers_ to one of the two variables in question.
> 
> Ah, I see; the data itself gets kmalloc'd, and you just want 
> to discard the original pointer and size.  Fair enough.  Sorry 
> for the false alarm.

Ok - thanks for the clarification - I'll keep the commit as-is, 
agreed?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/