From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755880Ab1LBAE5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 19:04:57 -0500 Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:45692 "EHLO out4.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755746Ab1LBAE4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 19:04:56 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: n2tRQXSjguUIn8NSnEbC9WFlIMSJIpcyFsQGkcXSXzne 1322784295 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 16:03:50 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Alessandro Rubini Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@ozlabs.org, siglesia@cern.ch, manohar.vanga@cern.ch, dave.martin@linaro.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 0/1] making order in file2alias Message-ID: <20111202000350.GA6507@kroah.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:45:25AM +0100, Alessandro Rubini wrote: > (this message is the RFC, the patch itself is expected to be fine) > > This is a repost of what I've sent on Nov 4th. Since Rusty asked to > only do the first step, here it is. I rebased on next-20111201 and it > still works fine. Well, some of us disagree with Rusty :) As he's still the maintainer of the module code, I'll defer to him though. > As for the previous 2/2 (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/4/127 ), > I still think it makes sense. And as Dave Martin suggested, we can > do without the array. > > Thus, I may prepare three smaller steps, if that's acceptable (greg?) > > step 1: create the ELF section so ENTRY() lines can leave the array > (and change name accordingly). > > step 2: each ENTRY() line can be moved just after the associated code > (this means that a new bus is just a single hunk, not 2 of them) > > step 3: I create the headers needed to move code and ENTRY in separate > files. This is some movement around, not trivial so it may > deserve a patch in itself. > > step 4 and later ones: Individual busses may reach their own external file, > conditionally compiled per Kconfig rules. > > If that's something worth evaluating, I can do that over the weekend. That sounds very reasonable to me. thanks, greg k-h