* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > so instead of the current hardcoded levels: > > > > core_initcall(sysctl_init); > > > > we could have natural constructs like: > > > > initcall_depends_on(sysctl_init, securityfs_init); > > initcall_depends_on(sock_init, sysctl_init) > > would be a TOTAL DISASTER, because if you do that, then you are > essentially back to the insane situation where people need to know > what other parts are enabled. well, as i mentioned it was and is on the backburner, because we went over the same list of problems that you mentioned: harder to read and interpret and debug, harder to reproduce boot ordering, etc. but i'd still like the address the above specific point: it would be silly to propagate Kconfig dependencies into the initcall dependencies, why do you assume we'd do that? When PROCFS or PNP is turned off, then their initcall symbols should naturally alias to some NOP definition, a function that is immediately marked as 'done'. We _already_ have NOP stubs for many initializer symbols. and note: > > ( More details: we'd have a number of compatibility and convenience > > symbols as well - well-known initialization stages for various > > customary phases of bootup. One convenience symbol would be "memory_done()": to indicate that kmalloc() and all the other memory allocators are up and running and usable. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
