On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 08:59:45AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 07:02:12PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 01:45:57PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > arguably it simply isn't a good idea to use static_call() in __exit > > > code anyway, since module unload is never a performance critical path. > > > > Couldn't you make the same argument about __init functions, which are > > allowed to do static calls? > > I suppose we could indeed make that argument. Much of that code was > copied from jump_label without much consideration. And I now I suppose > I'll have to consider jump_label in __exit too :/ > > > We might consider a STATIC_CALL_SITE_EXIT flag, but I suppose we've run > > out of flag space. > > Yeah, we're definitely short on flags. Let me try and figure out when > exactly it's all discarded.
Ha!, x86 stuffs .exit.text in [__init_begin, __init_end) and it is discarded right along with initmem. But that means it should match init and be tagged init and all *should* work, but somehow it doesn't... clearly I'm missing something again ARGH!
