Manish Katiyar wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Stefan Richter > <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> The changelog should note that this is a whitespace fix + initcall >> annotation change. Sorry, I didn't get the point of __initcall/device_initcall. It's not an annotation; it defines a call sequence level. > Replace deprecated __initcall with equivalent device_initcall. Also > fix whitespaces. ... > --- a/kernel/utsname_sysctl.c > +++ b/kernel/utsname_sysctl.c ... > @@ -142,4 +142,4 @@ static int __init utsname_sysctl_init(void) > return 0; > } > > -__initcall(utsname_sysctl_init); > +device_initcall(utsname_sysctl_init); It is equivalent, but is it also the most appropriate one? -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== -=-= -==-= http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
