From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mochel@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] devexit fixes in i82092.c
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 04:00:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C930993.1020909@mandrakesoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203160010510.2448-100000@home.transmeta.com>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>We could make one of the methods be "startup", of course, and move the
>actual device initialization there (and leave just the "find driver" in
>the initcall logic), but that would not get rid of the initcalls, it would
>just split them into two parts.
>
doing this has been mentioned independently a couple times, in fact...
And this may be a tangent, or maybe not: like I was trying to explain
to Gerard about regarding SCSI devices, it is often valuable to separate
the two steps. Gerard complained about the new PCI API not being able
to register devices (_register_, not probe) in the order he wished. And
my response was... sure you can. Just break it up into two steps, find
devices, and register devices. The ordering of the register calls in
the second step are entirely up the driver and/or subsystem. Similarly,
the IDE subsystem could handle the mapping of the BIOS-ordered
/dev/hd[a-d] completely independently of probing and registering hosts
and devices. [which, in turn, is useful in moving to a more dynamic
/dev among other things] Right now the IDE probe order is a bit
delicate, and full of hueristics that could be cleaned up with such a
separation.
Jeff, in a rambling mood
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-16 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-16 0:57 [PATCH] devexit fixes in i82092.c Anders Gustafsson
2002-03-16 1:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-03-16 2:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-16 7:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-03-16 7:51 ` Keith Owens
2002-03-16 8:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-03-16 9:00 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2002-03-16 9:50 ` Keith Owens
2002-03-25 19:15 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-03-16 8:51 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-16 17:35 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-16 17:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-25 19:19 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-03-16 9:40 ` Arjan van de Ven
2002-03-22 15:47 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-16 10:32 ` David Woodhouse
2002-03-16 19:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-03-16 21:00 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-16 22:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-03-16 22:28 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-16 22:16 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-03-16 22:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-03-16 23:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-03-16 23:15 ` Dave Jones
2002-03-21 15:12 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-25 19:02 ` Patrick Mochel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-24 23:36 Alexander Stohr
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=3C930993.1020909@mandrakesoft.com \
--to=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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