Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752155Ab2FNVlZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:41:25 -0400 Received: from s15943758.onlinehome-server.info ([217.160.130.188]:41562 "EHLO mail.x86-64.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751328Ab2FNVlY (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:41:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 23:41:43 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Paul Bolle Cc: Jim Cromie , rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, jbaron@redhat.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] init: add comments to keep initcall-names in sync with initcall levels Message-ID: <20120614214143.GD32312@aftab.osrc.amd.com> References: <20120612105913.GA8404@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <1339699862-3731-1-git-send-email-jim.cromie@gmail.com> <1339701783.5981.5.camel@x61.thuisdomein> <1339708913.5981.16.camel@x61.thuisdomein> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1339708913.5981.16.camel@x61.thuisdomein> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1890 Lines: 47 On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:21:53PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > > > What problem does this solve? > > > > kernel/params.c and other builtins are also modules - at least wrt > > how theyre reported by dynamic_debug: > > > > kernel/params.c:121 [params]parse_one =_ "Unknown argument `%s'\012" > > kernel/params.c:117 [params]parse_one =_ "Unknown argument: calling %p\012" > > kernel/params.c:108 [params]parse_one =_ "They are equal! Calling %p\012" > > kernel/params.c:188 [params]parse_args =_ "Parsing ARGS: %s\012" > > > > The advice to avoid those macros does not apply to builtin "modules" > > I don't think I use dynamic_debug, but still, a pair of square brackets > doesn't make that some part of the kernel is considered to be a module, > does it? And more importantly, even if there's a difference between > "module" and "loadable module", which I rather doubt, aren't the people > who are expected to read this comment also expected to understand the > relevance of the preceding > #else /* MODULE */ > > line? I don't understand one thing: what's wrong with adding another word to the comment so that it explicitly states what "modules" this comment is referring to? Can you give me at least one technical reason against the comment being as precise as possible, even to the point of tautology. So what if it says "loadable modules"? I don't see anything wrong with that. So please, let's drop the bikeshedding and get on with our lives :-) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551 -- 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/