lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-15 18:11    [W:1.118 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site