linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, rpjday@crashcourse.ca,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] macintosh: replace deprecated __initcall with device_initcall
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 19:08:37 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1210842517.17568.41.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080514234102.d5735054.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2996 bytes --]

On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 23:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:28:28 +1000 Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 23:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:14:38 +1000 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > akpm@linux-foundation.org writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > -__initcall(adb_init);
> > > > > +device_initcall(adb_init);
> > > > 
> > > > There's no particular reason why this needs to go in 2.6.26, is there?
> > > > It looks to me like something that I should queue up for 2.6.27.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > No, this make no difference in code generation - it's just a
> > > use-the-modern-interface thing.
> > 
> > I missed the memo about __initcall being deprecated, or is it only
> > deprecated for use in device drivers?
> > 
> 
> It's just old-fashioned, that's all.
>
> #define pure_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("0",fn,0)
> 
> #define core_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("1",fn,1)
> #define core_initcall_sync(fn)		__define_initcall("1s",fn,1s)
> #define postcore_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("2",fn,2)
> #define postcore_initcall_sync(fn)	__define_initcall("2s",fn,2s)
> #define arch_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("3",fn,3)
> #define arch_initcall_sync(fn)		__define_initcall("3s",fn,3s)
> #define subsys_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("4",fn,4)
> #define subsys_initcall_sync(fn)	__define_initcall("4s",fn,4s)
> #define fs_initcall(fn)			__define_initcall("5",fn,5)
> #define fs_initcall_sync(fn)		__define_initcall("5s",fn,5s)
> #define rootfs_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("rootfs",fn,rootfs)
> #define device_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("6",fn,6)
> #define device_initcall_sync(fn)	__define_initcall("6s",fn,6s)
> #define late_initcall(fn)		__define_initcall("7",fn,7)
> #define late_initcall_sync(fn)		__define_initcall("7s",fn,7s)
> 
> #define __initcall(fn) device_initcall(fn)
> 
> See, we have the nicely-ordered foo_initcall()'s, and the old-fashioned
> legacy __initcall happens to map onto device_initcall().
> 
> Such code should use device_initcall() directly.  So we see at which
> stage in initcalls this function will be called.

Yeah fair enough. 

A little git'ing tells me there were 31 new __initcall()'s added between
2.6.24 and 2.6.25, and there are 12 more lurking between 2.6.25 and
linux-next. They're breeding!

You can't stick a #warning inside a #define can you? How about:

#define __initcall(fn)				\
do {						\
int Use_device_initcall_not___initcall_please;	\
device_initcall(fn);				\
} while (0)

Which gives:
warning: unused variable ‘Use_device_initcall_not___initcall_please’

..

Yeah OK that was a joke.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-15  9:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-14 23:12 [patch 3/4] macintosh: replace deprecated __initcall with device_initcall akpm
2008-05-15  4:14 ` Paul Mackerras
2008-05-15  6:06   ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-15  6:28     ` Michael Ellerman
2008-05-15  6:41       ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-15  9:08         ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2008-05-15 17:43           ` Andrew Morton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1210842517.17568.41.camel@localhost \
    --to=michael@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).