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.