Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] Unifying kernel initialization | Date | Thu, 06 May 1999 09:45:57 -0400 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de> said: > On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 08:34:29PM +0200, Paul Rusty Russell wrote:
[...]
> > Rather than a numeric priority, give it a name, a list of things that > > must preceed it, and a list of things it must preceed. Calculate the > > initialisation order at runtime, and then drop that whole section of > > code and data after initialization.
> That sounds too much like second system effect to me.
True
> I think a numeric priority is fine. It would be only used in > exceptional situations anyways, the majority of drivers don't care.
But a list of prerequisites is easy to handle during build using tsort(1), and easier on the hackers that put the whole thing together. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
- 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/
| |