Hi David, On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:43:56PM -0400, David Dgien wrote: > This series fixes various bugs and bit-rot issues with the module > loading code. It also ports a couple of modules features from the Linux > kernel: arch specific section fixups, and module PLTs for ARM modules, > to contain veneers for 'bl' instructions. > > There are two things in this series I'm looking for feedback on: > Linux implements module_frob_arch_sections as a weak symbol for the > default case. I didn't see any other "weak" functions in barebox, so I > wasn't sure if using that was acceptable. For things that are really mutually exclusive like different implementations on different architectures I think weak functions are ok. They are not ok as a quick hack for hooking something into something though. > Since the Kconfig > HAVE_MOD_ARCH_SPECIFIC already exists as part of the change, I just used > that to define a static inline default implementation, but using a weak > function would make that slightly cleaner. > > And in the patch that added the init macros to module.h, I wasn't sure > if it would be okay to pollute init.h with the #ifndef MODULE > directives, so instead I just #undef'd all of the initcalls before > redefining them in module.h. If it's okay to add the #ifndef MODULE to > init.h, that would be significantly cleaner than the current > implementation. I think it's ok to add #ifndef MODULE to init.h Anyway, what do you need modules for? Do you have a good reason or is it just for the fun of it? Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
