From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: mochel@osdl.org
Cc: anton@samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.5.19] Oops during PCI scan on Alpha
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 14:34:53 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020604.143453.35012407.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0206041427260.654-100000@geena.pdx.osdl.net>
From: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 14:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> Linkers are allowed to reorder object files unless you tell them
> explicitly not to.
>
> This is why you need to put this stuff into a seperate initcall level.
> This is precisely why I suggest postcore_initcall as the fix.
Ok, how about just keeping it a subsys_initcall, like it was in the first
place?
Then there are ordering problems with subsys_initcalls which want to
add devices to sys_bus. In fact, arch_initcalls are the places where
most of the actual uses of subsys_bus registry.
So for the ump-teenth time, you need to init this thing EXACTLY after
core_initcalls. I can only say this so many times, this is the
initcall classification we need to fix this bug, "POST CORE INITCALL"
and "BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE".
One way to do that, for the ump-teenth time, is to rename
unused_initcall to postcore_initcall and use that new initcall
to fix the pci_bus and sys_bus generic bus initialization ordering
problems.
We're talking in circles and the fixes you're proposing are not
going to fix the bug, just create new versions of the old bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-04 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-02 20:06 [2.5.19] Oops during PCI scan on Alpha Jan-Benedict Glaw
2002-06-03 4:27 ` Anton Blanchard
2002-06-03 3:39 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-04 15:50 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 17:07 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2002-06-04 18:58 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 18:26 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2002-06-05 14:20 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2002-06-04 18:13 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-04 19:38 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 19:42 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-04 20:56 ` Tom Rini
2002-06-04 21:10 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 21:14 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-04 21:14 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 21:23 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-04 21:29 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 21:34 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2002-06-04 22:03 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-04 22:06 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-05 14:23 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2002-06-05 22:29 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-06 0:01 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-06-06 13:22 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2002-06-23 17:03 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
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=20020604.143453.35012407.davem@redhat.com \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
/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