[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061027160626.8ac4a910.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:06:26 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [patch] drivers: wait for threaded probes between initcall
levels
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 23:59:30 +0100
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> Ar Gwe, 2006-10-27 am 11:42 -0700, ysgrifennodd Andrew Morton:
> > IOW, we want to be multithreaded _within_ an initcall level, but not between
> > different levels.
>
> Thats actually insufficient. We have link ordered init sequences in
> large numbers of driver subtrees (ATA, watchdog, etc). We'll need
> several more initcall layers to fix that.
>
It would be nice to express those dependencies in some clearer and less
fragile manner than link order. I guess finer-grained initcall levels
would do that, but it doesn't scale very well.
But whatever. I think multithreaded probing just doesn't pass the
benefit-versus-hassle test, sorry. Make it dependent on CONFIG_GREGKH ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists