From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kai@tp1.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Subject: Re: Initcall / device model meltdown?
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:48:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030117204858.GA2359@brodo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3104.1042835842@www5.gmx.net>
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 09:37:22PM +0100, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 07:23:56PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > 1. the device model requires a certain initialisation order.
> > 2. modules need to use module_init() which means the initialisation order
> > is link-order dependent, despite our multi-level initialisation system.
modules don't really need module_init() -- you can use the others, too:
in include/linux/init.h:
/* Don't use these in modules, but some people do... */
#define core_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define postcore_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define arch_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define subsys_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define fs_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define device_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define late_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
So it makes sense to use the appropriate initcall level even in files that
can be compiled as modules, these #defines do their work for you. We should
update that comment, though.
Dominik
--- linux-original/include/linux/init.h 2003-01-17 16:51:23.000000000 +0100
+++ linux/include/linux/init.h 2003-01-17 21:46:34.000000000 +0100
@@ -129,7 +129,10 @@
#else /* MODULE */
-/* Don't use these in modules, but some people do... */
+/* Alternatively, you can still use these initcall levels to
+ * ensure proper initialization order when modularized stuff
+ * is compiled into the kernel.
+ */
#define core_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define postcore_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
#define arch_initcall(fn) module_init(fn)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-17 20:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-17 19:23 Initcall / device model meltdown? Russell King
2003-01-17 19:32 ` Jeff Garzik
[not found] ` <3104.1042835842@www5.gmx.net>
2003-01-17 20:48 ` Dominik Brodowski [this message]
2003-01-17 19:56 ` Kai Germaschewski
2003-01-17 20:14 ` Russell King
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=20030117204858.GA2359@brodo.de \
--to=linux@brodo.de \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=kai@tp1.ruhr-uni-bochum.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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