On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 09:29 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Le Sat, 23 Feb 2008 10:43:37 +0800, > Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > > > This is not quite what Peter and I were thinking of, I think. It's not > > at all generic. How about a section that simply contains a set of > > function pointers, a macro to add things to that section, and a > > function that calls all the pointers in that section. Eg: > > > > CALLBACK_SECTION(init_cpu_amd, "cpuvendor.init"); > > invoke_callback_section("cpuvendor.init"); > > > > ..which would give us a generic facility we could use in various > > places. > > I see. Probably doable. How would it work in the LD script file ? Your > mechanism allows to specify any section name, but AFAIK, the sections > must be explicitly listed in the kernel LD script in order to be > included in the final kernel image. Am I missing something ?
I can't see any way to avoid it, but we can leave it to future generations to come up with something more clever. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/