[PATCH] drivers/hwtracing: make coresight-etm-perf.c explicitly non-modular

[Mathieu Poirier]

On 29 February 2016 at 19:56, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:10:06AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>> On 27 February 2016 at 13:21, Paul Gortmaker
>> <paul.gortmaker at windriver.com> wrote:
>> > In commit 941943cf519f7cacbbcecee5c4ef4b77b466bd5c ("drivers/hwtracing:
>> > make coresight-* explicitly non-modular") we removed all uses of
>> > modular functions/macros in favour of their built-in equivlents in
>> > this subsystem.
>> >
>> > However that commit and commit 0bcbf2e30ff2271b54f54c8697a185f7d86ec6e4
>> > ("coresight: etm-perf: new PMU driver for ETM tracers") were in flight
>> > at the same time, and hence one new non-modular user of module_init
>> > crept back in.  Fix it up like we did all the others.
>> >
>> > Since module_init translates to device_initcall in the non-modular
>> > case, the init ordering remains unchanged with this commit.
>> >
>> > Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin at linux.intel.com>
>> > Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier at linaro.org>
>> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker at windriver.com>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c | 4 ++--
>> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c
>> > index 36153a77e982..755125f7917f 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c
>> > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
>> >  #include <linux/device.h>
>> >  #include <linux/list.h>
>> >  #include <linux/mm.h>
>> > -#include <linux/module.h>
>> > +#include <linux/init.h>
>> >  #include <linux/perf_event.h>
>> >  #include <linux/slab.h>
>> >  #include <linux/types.h>
>> > @@ -390,4 +390,4 @@ static int __init etm_perf_init(void)
>> >
>> >         return ret;
>> >  }
>> > -module_init(etm_perf_init);
>> > +device_initcall(etm_perf_init);
>>
>> Yes of course - Applied.
>>
>> Greg, given the triviality of the changes, can you still pick this up
>> for the next merge window?
>
> Yes, want me to take it directly, or do you have more patches to send
> me?

Please go ahead and pick it up - there will be no more changes for the
4.6 cycle.

Acked-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier at linaro.org>

Thanks,
Mathieu

>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h