On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:01:33AM +0800, Youling Tang wrote:
> - It doesn't feel good to have only one subinit/exit in a file.
> Assuming that there is only one file in each file, how do we
> ensure that the files are linked in order?(Is it sorted by *.o
> in the Makefile?)
Yes, link order already matterns for initialization order for built-in
code, so this is a well known concept.
> - Even if the order of each init is linked correctly, then the
> runtime will be iterated through the .subinitcall.init section,
> which executes each initfn in sequence (similar to do_initcalls),
> which means that no other code can be inserted between each subinit.
I don't understand this comment. What do you mean with no other
code could be inserted?
> If module_subinit is called in module_init, other code can be inserted
> between subinit, similar to the following:
>
> ```
> static int __init init_example(void)
> {
> module_subinit(inita, exita);
>
> otherthing...
>
> module_subinit(initb, exitb);
>
> return 0;
> }
Yikes. That's really not the point of having init calls, but just
really, really convoluted control flow.
> module_init(init_example);
> ```
>
> IMHO, module_subinit() might be better called in module_init().
I strongly disagree.
