On (07/14/17 14:51), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> index f35d3ac3b8c7..1ebe1525ef64 100644
> --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> @@ -2659,8 +2659,16 @@ static int __init printk_late_init(void)
> int ret;
>
> for_each_console(con) {
> - if ((con->flags & CON_BOOT) &&
> - init_section_intersects(con, sizeof(*con))) {
> + if (!(con->flags & CON_BOOT))
> + continue;
> +
> + /* Check addresses that might be used for enabled consoles. */
> + if (init_section_intersects(con, sizeof(*con)) ||
> + init_section_contains(con->write, 0) ||
> + init_section_contains(con->read, 0) ||
> + init_section_contains(con->device, 0) ||
> + init_section_contains(con->unblank, 0) ||
> + init_section_contains(con->data, 0)) {
sort of a problem here is that the next time anyone adds a new ->foo()
callback to struct console, that person also needs to remember to update
printk_late_init().
a completely crazy idea,
can we have a dedicated "console init" section which we will not offload
if we see keep_bootcon?
or... even crazier... disable bootmem offloading (do not offload init
section) at all if we see keep_bootcon? keep_bootcon is a purely debugging
option which people enable when things are bad and unclear, no one should
be using it otherwise, so may be that idea can be a way to go.
thoughts?
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
