Re: Initcall / device model meltdown?

[Dominik Brodowski]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 09:37:22PM +0100, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 07:23:56PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > 1. the device model requires a certain initialisation order.
> > 2. modules need to use module_init() which means the initialisation order
> >    is link-order dependent, despite our multi-level initialisation system.

modules don't really need module_init() -- you can use the others, too:
in include/linux/init.h:

/* Don't use these in modules, but some people do... */
#define core_initcall(fn)               module_init(fn)
#define postcore_initcall(fn)           module_init(fn)
#define arch_initcall(fn)               module_init(fn)
#define subsys_initcall(fn)             module_init(fn)
#define fs_initcall(fn)                 module_init(fn)
#define device_initcall(fn)             module_init(fn)
#define late_initcall(fn)               module_init(fn)

So it makes sense to use the appropriate initcall level even in files that
can be compiled as modules, these #defines do their work for you. We should
update that comment, though.

	Dominik

--- linux-original/include/linux/init.h	2003-01-17 16:51:23.000000000 +0100
+++ linux/include/linux/init.h	2003-01-17 21:46:34.000000000 +0100
@@ -129,7 +129,10 @@
 
 #else /* MODULE */
 
-/* Don't use these in modules, but some people do... */
+/* Alternatively, you can still use these initcall levels to
+ * ensure proper initialization order when modularized stuff
+ * is compiled into the kernel.
+ */
 #define core_initcall(fn)		module_init(fn)
 #define postcore_initcall(fn)		module_init(fn)
 #define arch_initcall(fn)		module_init(fn)