Re: [patch 05/11] [PATCH 05/11] x86: Moved microcode.c tomicrocode_intel.c.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Giacomo A. Catenazzi <cate@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> That sounds like a single-module solution would be the best way to 
>> go. All dependencies would then be handled inside the module.
>
> Single module probably is more difficult to maintain.

why? In this case we have just two relevant CPU microcode drivers - and 
we dont expect their number to grow significantly. So it should be 
perfectly clean to link everything into a single module.

In fact as this example has shown it a single-module solution has 
numerous advantages, as it simplifies userspace interactions.

Taken to the extreme, a single-image (bzImage) kernel has many 
advantages over a many-modules kernel as well. So we only want to 
modularize when we absolutely have to, and this is not one of those 
cases.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/