On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I was kind of thinking that a better way of doing this is to use a
> > special ELF section that contains the initializer. Then hosts.c would just
>
> That facility already exists and I believe Jeff Garzik has scsi on his
> current hit list for it. So the order will matter real soon now.
>
> > walk the list until it got to whatever was the end - in this case, the link
> > order would become quite critical.
OK, sounds good. This is another cleanup I had been thinking
about for a couple of years, but never got up high enough on the radar
screen.
At point point I had the notion that instead of busting our asses
to make sure the link order is correct, we could simply add a field to the
initializer to be used for ordering. For most host adapters, there are no
ordering requirements at all, so we would just leave the initializer the
same and take a default value. For those cases where we do care, use the
weighting to effectively sort the list.
The thing that scares me is that a lot of the dependencies that
are in there are probably not well documented, and it would be safer to
just maintain the current ordering when linking.
-Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST