Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 05:40:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 05:40:03 -0400 Received: from medusa.sparta.lu.se ([194.47.250.193]:25186 "EHLO medusa.sparta.lu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 05:39:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 10:29:39 +0200 (MET DST) From: Bjorn Wesen To: Keith Owens cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: crc32 cleanups In-Reply-To: <16790.1002968731@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > Does not work if all the code that uses crc32 is in a module. No > references from the main kernel so crc32 is not included by the linker. So make the CRC32 code a module itself ? > ???! __initcall entries are executed in the order that they are linked > into the kernel. The linkage order is controlled by the order that > Makefiles are processed during kbuild and by line order within each > Makefile. There is definitely a priority order for __initcall code. That is in practice an unuseable "priority" (I'd like to consider that a highly stochastic variable :) Not to mention that as an individual sub-project maintainer you can't go around changing higher level makefiles all the time just to get your particular initcall chain in order (again, in practice). You could _conceivably_ build an initcall dependency system by adding some "initcall_requires" macros which put the dependant other calls into another linker table, which the kernel would resolve at boot. /BW - 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/