Re: [PATCH v1] xen: add late init call in start_xen

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Boyoun,

Thanks for your interest in Xen and thanks for your contribution!


On Thu, 28 Jul 2022, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 28.07.2022 11:22, Boyoun Park wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > This patch added late_initcall to deal with
> > 
> > some init functions which should be called
> > 
> > after other init functions in start_xen.
> > 
> > If this patch is added,
> > 
> > then the original initcall in xen will be treated
> > 
> > as early_initcall and the late_initcall
> > 
> > which is added by this patch will be
> > 
> > called sequentially.
> > 
> > I cannot send patches through git send-email
> > 
> > due to some security issues in my work.
> > 
> > So intead, I just send the patches manually.
> 
> Which is fine, but you want to configure your mail client such that it
> doesn't mangle the patch. Albeit I see that to cover for that at least
> you've also attached both the patch and a cover letter. For a single
> patch a cover letter can normally be omitted, but if you don't then
> even if you're sending without "git send-email" you will want to send
> both as separate mails, with the patch being a reply to the cover
> letter thread root.

Yeah. Boyoun, if you only have a couple of patches then it is fine to
send them manually. Otherwise, if you have many patches, you can send
them in attachment as tarball and I'll send them all to xen-devel using
git-send-email for you (of course keeping you as original author and
retaining all Signed-off-bys).


> > Subject: [PATCH v1] xen: add late init call in start_xen
> > 
> > This patch added late_initcall section in init.data.
> > 
> > The late initcall would be called after initcall
> > 
> > in the start_xen function.
> > 
> > Some initializing works on priority should be run
> > 
> > in do_initcalls and other non-prioritized works
> > 
> > would be run in do_late_initcalls.
> > 
> > To call some functions by late_initcall,
> > 
> > then it is possible by using
> > 
> > __late_initcall(/*Function Name*/);
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Boyoun Park <boyoun.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> So I could imagine this patch to be in a series where a subsequent
> patch then adds an actual use of the new functionality. Without
> that what you're proposing is to add dead code.

Yeah, I think it would be cool to have late initcalls but it makes sense
to add them if we have someone that makes use of them.