lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper
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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-01-06 16:41    [W:0.079 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site