Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262529AbVDGRCd (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 13:02:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262502AbVDGRCd (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 13:02:33 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:43725 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262492AbVDGRCI (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 13:02:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 10:01:47 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Magnus Damm Cc: roland@topspin.com, asterixthegaul@gmail.com, damm@opensource.se, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] disable built-in modules V2 Message-Id: <20050407100147.7b91a2d2.rddunlap@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20050405225747.15125.8087.59570@clementine.local> <54b5dbf505040618324186678a@mail.gmail.com> <528y3v72al.fsf@topspin.com> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: SvC&!/v_Hr`MvpQ*|}uez16KH[#EmO2Tn~(r-y+&Jb}?Zhn}c:Eee&zq`cMb_[5`tT(22ms (.P84,bq_GBdk@Kgplnrbj;Y`9IF`Q4;Iys|#3\?*[:ixU(UR.7qJT665DxUP%K}kC0j5,UI+"y-Sw mn?l6JGvyI^f~2sSJ8vd7s[/CDY]apD`a;s1Wf)K[,.|-yOLmBl0 wrote: | > > > -#define module_init(x) __initcall(x); | > > > +#define module_init(x) __initcall(x); __module_init_disable(x); | > > | > > It would be better if there is brackets around them... like | > > | > > #define module_init(x) { __initcall(x); __module_init_disable(x); } | > > | > > then we know it wont break some code like | > > | > > if (..) | > > module_init(x); | > | > This is all completely academic, since module_init() is a declaration | > that won't be inside any code, but in general it's better still to use | > the do { } while (0) idiom like | > | > #define module_init(x) do { __initcall(x); __module_init_disable(x); } while (0) | > | > so it won't break code like | > | > if (..) | > module_init(x); | > else | > something_else(); | > | > (Yes, that code is nonsense but if you're going to nitpick, go all the way...) | | Right. =) | Anyway, besides nitpicking, is there any reason not to include this | code? Or is the added feature considered plain bloat? Yes, the kernel | will become a bit larger, but all the data added by this patch will go | into the init section. Looks like a good idea to me. --- ~Randy - 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/