Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] param: Adapt MN10300 to the new parameter handling regime | Date | Fri, 5 Dec 2008 23:25:22 +1030 |
| |
On Friday 05 December 2008 22:28:16 David Howells wrote: > I think you're missing: > > #define param_mem_keeps_reference 0 > > from the stuff you added.
Ah thanks, I didn't actually *cough* test it.
> With that, the core_param stuff does work for mem=... But I object to > mem_override not being __initdata. I also don't think the parameter should > appear in sysfs - that's just a waste of resources.
If you set the perm to 0, then it won't appear in sys, and hence can be __initdata.
> It should, perhaps, > appear in /proc/cmdline, but for some reason it does not.
Hmm, that's more concering. I'll dig into this in the morning.
> I can live without > that, though, since its effect appears in /proc/meminfo. > > Also, something else to consider: If CONFIG_MODULES=n and CONFIG_SYSFS=n, > should the contents of kernel/params.c be discarded along with the __init > sections?
Yes, I think so. YA __init variant, but it can be local to kernel/params.c I think.
Cheers, Rusty.
| |