lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 1 Feb 2000 12:30:16 +0100
FromPavel Machek <>
SubjectRe: [linux-usb] __initcall diff, version 2
Hi!

> > I like the idea of this __initcall patch for USB.
> > However, I've searched other 2.3.4x drivers and found
> > very little use of __initcall.
>
> It's fairly new. I heartily encourage initcalls, they are _much_ nicer
> than explicit initialization. The explicit way only makes sense for (a)
> old drivers and (b) code that requires certain ordering.
>
> However, instead of using "__initcall" directly, I would suggest using
> "module_init()" and "module_exit()". Which will do the right things
> for

Notice that I'm going to do that, but that diff will be slightly
bigger. I wanted to have simple thing working first. Currently, I add
single line to each driver, module_init() will require me to rename
functions and kill ugly #ifdef MODULE.

Pavel
--
The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel
GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [from the cache]
©2003-2010