Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 08 May 2009 13:23:17 +0200 | From | Peter Oberparleiter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] kernel: constructor support |
| |
Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> * Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Disable constructor support for usermode Linux to prevent conflicts >>>> with host glibc. >>>> +++ linux-2.6.30-rc4/init/Kconfig >>>> @@ -16,6 +16,11 @@ config DEFCONFIG_LIST >>>> default "$ARCH_DEFCONFIG" >>>> default "arch/$ARCH/defconfig" >>>> +config CONSTRUCTORS >>>> + bool >>>> + depends on !UML >>>> + default y >>>> + >>>> menu "General setup" >>> Hm, excluding UML like that is sad. Is there no better solution? >> UML is excluded because in that environment constructors are >> called by the host glibc, so there is no need for kernel support >> on UML (in fact it would break things). >> >> Or were you referring to the actual way the exclusion is >> implemented? > > the way it's done is OK (there's really just UML in this situation), > but the question is really, shouldnt it be possible to coverage-test > UML instances 'from the inside'?
From a mere gcov perspective, coverage-testing from the outside is superior because that is the way it was meant to be run in the first place.
> > Plus, if any other kernel facility grows out of this or makes use of > it, UML will be left out in the cold.
I'm afraid that trying to over-engineer the gcov-kernel mechanism at this time might serve neither the gcov-kernel users, nor potential new users. Once the base is established, it will be far easier to decide which other purposes the infrastructure can serve (without completely bending it).
| |