[PATCH RFC 02/22] x86: intel_epb: Don't rely on link order

[Russell King (Oracle)]

From: James Morse <james.morse at arm.com>

intel_epb_init() is called as a subsys_initcall() to register cpuhp
callbacks. The callbacks make use of get_cpu_device() which will return
NULL unless register_cpu() has been called. register_cpu() is called
from topology_init(), which is also a subsys_initcall().

This is fragile. Moving the register_cpu() to a different
subsys_initcall()  leads to a NULL dereference during boot.

Make intel_epb_init() a late_initcall(), user-space can't provide a
policy before this point anyway.

Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse at arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel at armlinux.org.uk>
---
subsys_initcall_sync() would be an option, but moving the register_cpu()
calls into ACPI also means adding a safety net for CPUs that are online
but not described properly by firmware. This lives in subsys_initcall_sync().
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c
index e4c3ba91321c..f18d35fe27a9 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c
@@ -237,4 +237,4 @@ static __init int intel_epb_init(void)
 	cpuhp_remove_state(CPUHP_AP_X86_INTEL_EPB_ONLINE);
 	return ret;
 }
-subsys_initcall(intel_epb_init);
+late_initcall(intel_epb_init);
-- 
2.30.2