On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 11:54:13AM +0000, David Vrabel wrote: > On 02/01/14 18:50, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:32:03PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote: > >> On 01/01/14 04:35, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >>> @@ -1320,4 +1323,4 @@ static int __gnttab_init(void) > >>> return gnttab_init(); > >>> } > >>> > >>> -core_initcall(__gnttab_init); > >>> +core_initcall_sync(__gnttab_init); > >> > >> Why has this become _sync? > > > > It needs to run _after_ the xen_pvh_gnttab_setup has run (which is > > at gnttab_init): > > > The use of core_initcall_sync() doesn't imply any ordering to me. Can't
It has a clear ordering property. > you call xen_pvh_gnttab_setup() from within __gnttab_init() ? No. That is due to the fact that __gnttab_init() is in drivers/xen and is also used by the ARM code. Stefano in his previous review mentioned he would like PVH specific code in arch/x86: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/18/507 > > David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
