Re: [PATCH] initcall dependency solution.

Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Fri, 07 Jun 2002 20:15:01 +1000

In message <20020607072636.GA20454@codepoet.org> you write:
> On Fri Jun 07, 2002 at 12:02:11PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > This patch allows you to name initcall dependencies and subsystems.
> > It is backward compatible with the current initcall levels, but
> > doesn't respect link order: a couple of changes to make it boot, but
> > more will be needed I expect.
>
> Interesting. So in theory this mechanism could also be used
> to speed booting by parallelizing execution of each independent
> initcall dependancy tree...

In theory. But the right solution is to move userspace as soon as
possible, for spinning up non-root disks, etc.

More importantly we can use the same mechanism to say "do this after
all cpus are up" or "do this once we have a userspace" etc, and move
more things to initcalls (ie. neaten the boot code).

Rusty.

--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
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/