Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] automatic initcalls | Date | Tue, 30 Jul 2002 09:46:15 +1000 |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0207281358070.28515-100000@serv> you write: > Hi, > > On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > - I only look at modules which contain an initcall > > > - I only order initcalls of level 6 and 7 > > > > You don't seem to handle the ordering of initcalls within a module > > though: see net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack.o for an example of > > multiple inits which would be much better as separate initcalls. > > Actually I'm most interested in ordering "module_init()" and you can have > only one of them per module or how do you want to implement multiple > initcalls per module?
Sorry, you are right. That was a brain fart.
> > Especially since you don't cover any of the really interesting cases. > > Maybe if you could slowly extend it to cover the rest? (Hah, I > > know!). > > I wouldn't mind if the remaining initcalls are converted to explicit > dependencies, but it's possible to sort automatically everything that can > be built as modules.
Yes, I think we should do this: merge the two together. You seem to be in a coding frenzy: want to do the first cut?
I'll probably change my initdepends section format to make it shorter and easier to parse. But that change should be independent.
> > > +init/generated-initcalls.c: .allinit.defs > > > + set -e; echo '#include <linux/init.h>' > $@; \ > > > + sed -n < $< "s,^T ,,p" | sort > .defined.all; \ > > > > I think you mean something like: > > > > sed -n "s,^T ,,p" < $< > > Isn't that the same?
Argh, not my day, clearly. Let's pretend I didn't send that mail, shall we?
Cheers, Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |