Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:13:30 -0400 | From | Gregory Haskins <> | Subject | Re: Tips for module_init() dependencies |
| |
Randy Dunlap wrote: > 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.
Hi Randy,
Something like this?
----------
# cat drivers/bar/Makefile
bar.o: foo.o obj-$CONFIG_BAR += bar.o
----------
?
Kind Regards, -Greg
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |