Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:06:45 -0700 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: Tips for module_init() dependencies |
| |
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:58:19 -0400 Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 09:01 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: > > > >> may break, because the kernel seems to have no concept of > >> interdependency between foo_init() and bar_init(), and therefore > >> bar_init() may call foo() before foo_init() has executed. > >> > >> There are various ways to solve this problem, such as deferring calling > >> foo() with a workqueue or something, but I was wondering if there was a > >> better/standard way to do this that I am missing? > >> > >> The problem I am having specifically is that I am trying to call > >> configfs_register_subsystem() in a module_init(), but this breaks when > >> built into the kernel based on sheer bad luck that configfs gets > >> initialized after me. To date I have worked around this by forcing my > >> code to only support built-in, and using late_initcall() instead or > >> module_init. This works, but it only means I am putting the problem off > >> (code that depends on *me* has to use similar tricks, etc. > > > > You can't modify the build order so your module get "builtin" after > > configfs? > > > > Hi Daniel, > > Possibly. > > A) Any suggestions on how? Can I express this in Kconfig or something > (i.e. "depends on FOO"). I currently have "select FOO" in the BAR > object, but this doesn't seem to be sufficient to describe the relationship.
Not in Kconfig, only in Makefile(s). and please put #comments in them explaining the ordering requirements/needs.
> B) Do I have to make the entire chain follow suit? (I have C deps on B, > B deps on A kind of scenarios) > > Kind Regards, > -Greg
--- ~Randy
| |