[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: modules, "modules" and CONFIG_LIST_SORT

    On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Randy Dunlap wrote:
    > On 03/07/10 03:23, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > >
    > > Honestly, personally I'd rather have a real library that modules can link
    > > to _before_ even loading into kernel space, but that's not how we've
    > > traditionally done things. So I guess we should just revert that commit.
    > xfs also needs "select LIST_SORT". I posted a patch for that a few days
    > ago and now Christoph Hellwig has asked me to send the patch directly to Linus,
    > but if Linus is going to revert the 'config LIST_SORT' patch, I'll skip it.

    Ok, it's reverted in my tree now, I'll push out soon.

    That said, I was serious about the "real library" thing. I do wonder if we
    should add a "link with standard kernel libraries" phase to the final
    module link, so that we can stop exporting silly things, and handle cases
    like this sanely without forcing it on everybody just because some module
    _might_ need it.

    For example, I've always hated how we export the 'libgcc' kind of symbols
    too. I think we'd generally be _much_ better off just linking them into
    the module directly, even if that means that we'll have multiple copies. I
    hate the things like


    that various architectures use. They have _nothing_ to do with real kernel
    interfaces, and are usually really small. And on several architectures a
    direct-linked call can be optimized by the linker in ways that external
    linkage cannot, so it might even improve code in some cases.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-07 19:17    [W:0.020 / U:18.740 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site