Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932189AbWCVRFu (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:05:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932191AbWCVRFu (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:05:50 -0500 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:43729 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932189AbWCVRFt (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:05:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:05:45 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: Jes Sorensen cc: Andrew Morton , Subject: Re: [patch -mm] notifier chain initialization In-Reply-To: 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 Content-Length: 1052 Lines: 33 On 22 Mar 2006, Jes Sorensen wrote: > Hi, > > This one is against the -mm tree, description below. > > Cheers, > Jes > > This patch goes on top of Alan Stern's > notifier-chain-update-api-changes.patch > > It restructures the notifier chain initialization macros by > introducing FOO_NOTIFIER_INIT() macros which are used by the > FOO_NOTIFIER_HEAD() macros. > > The benefit is that one can use the FOO_NOTIFIER_INIT() macro for > static initialization of a notifier chain. You probably mean _dynamic_ initialization of a notifier head. The current code handles static initialization just fine. There's nothing wrong with doing things like this. I didn't include initialization macros originally simply because there aren't any dynamically-initialized notifier heads in the kernel. Alan Stern - 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/