From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M3rlL-0003rt-Vv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:16 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M3rlG-0003r2-VS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:15 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50484 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M3rlG-0003qv-Ju for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:10 -0400 Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.138]:51868) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M3rlG-0004We-5s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:10 -0400 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e8.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n4CD1HZh011915 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:01:17 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n4CDB6vi207408 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:06 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n4CDB2uo032316 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 09:11:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4A097562.9050801@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 08:10:58 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] Add module infrastructure to QEMU References: <1242052009-27339-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <1242052009-27339-2-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <20090511215325.GB18336@game.jcrosoft.org> <4A08A087.9050708@us.ibm.com> <4A094392.3020000@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4A094392.3020000@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gerd Hoffmann Cc: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > On 05/12/09 00:02, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> why not use the constructor priority? >> >> We're just using constructors to register our real constructors so >> priority wouldn't really help us in the gcc constructors. > > Hmm? Just call the real constructors in the order they are registered > by the (prioritized) gcc constructors should do the trick, no? You don't necessarily want to run all of the constructors at once. Eventually, it would be nice to be generic enough that we could do that but I think it would be a bit difficult today. > cheers, > Gerd > -- Regards, Anthony Liguori