Hi, On 18/10/2014 at 10:11:27 +0200, Bird, Tim wrote : > The answer is pretty easy, I think. I tried to mainline it once but failed, > and didn't really try again. If it is being found useful, we should try to > mainline it again, this time with more persistence. The reason it got > rejected before IIRC was that you can accomplish a similar thing with > modules, with no changes to the kernel. But that doesn't cover the case where > the loadable modules feature of the kernel is turned off, which is common in > very small systems. >
There is also the case of subsystems that can't be compiled as modules. I didn't even try to push that to the mainline because I believe we prefer not having code without any users/calls in the kernel. You would still have to patch your kernel to use deferred_module_init(). It is also quite easy to port, maybe you can try to push it to mainline or if you want I can try to send an updated patch myself. > ---- Dirk Behme wrote ---- > > Hi, > > During the ELCE 2014 in Duesseldorf in Chris Hallinan's talk [1] there > has been the unanswered question why the deferred initcall patch [2] > isn't mainline, yet. > > Anybody remembers? > > Best regards > > Dirk > > > [1] http://sched.co/1yG5fmY > > [2] http://elinux.org/Deferred_Initcalls > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
