+++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/11/15 07:50 -0600]:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:15:54AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:On 11/10/2015, 05:45 AM, Jessica Yu wrote: > Intialize the list of relocation sections in the sample > klp_object (even if the list will be empty in this case). > Also mark module as a livepatch module so that the module > loader can appropriately initialize it. > > Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c > index fb8c861..2ef9345 100644 > --- a/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c > +++ b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c > @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ static struct klp_object objs[] = { > { > /* name being NULL means vmlinux */ > .funcs = funcs, > + .reloc_secs = LIST_HEAD_INIT(objs[0].reloc_secs) And I see now. This is not the best place for it though. I would put INIT_LIST_HEAD in the core code instead.Maybe the reloc_secs list should instead be an array of klp_reloc_sec structs, with the last entry being 0, similar to how we do other "lists" in the klp interface (e.g., klp_patch.objs, klp_object.funcs).
Yeah, I admit the asymmetry is a bit awkward. Plus we can add in a klp_for_each_reloc_sec to keep the api consistent. I'll go ahead and change this to follow the existing klp "list" format. Jessica -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
