Re: Link order madness :-(

Horst von Brand (vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl)
Mon, 03 Jun 2002 13:29:57 -0400


Jean Tourrilhes <jt@bougret.hpl.hp.com> said:

[...]

> The problem is *not* the networking initialisation (I wish
> people were *reading* my e-mails). The basic networking is initialised
> early enough. The various networking stacks could be initialised
> earlier, but I don't depend on them. Note that there might be a reason
> to initialise networking after the file system, so to do that we might
> need to insert a level between fs_initcall() and device_initcall().

If you insert enough levels, you are in another form of madness.

There should be a way of saying "This must be initialized after this, and
before that" (the "before that" might perhaps be taken care of by the
"that" itself). Spiced with a few "barriers": "Networking inited", etc.
appropiate bunch of descriptive one-liners (extracted from the sources?)
should give the right initialization order, or error out.

Yes, I know this has been proposed before and been thrown out (for no good
reason, AFAICS)

-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
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.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/