On Mon, 04 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > >-static int parse_hd_setup (char *line) { > >+static int __init parse_hd_setup (char *line) { .. > This one is fairly interesting and needs some resolution by someone > who knows....
thanks a lot for your quick and profund feedback. > On the surface, the patch is correct. > > Rusty, can you explain when __setup functions are called relative > to in-kernel init functions? or put another way, can a __setup > function safely call in __init function? > > Here's the function in question: > > static int parse_hd_setup (char *line) { > int ints[6]; > > (void) get_options(line, ARRAY_SIZE(ints), ints); > hd_setup(NULL, ints); > > return 1; > } > __setup("hd=", parse_hd_setup); > > > > Should we make parse_hd_setup() __init, > or make hd_setup() non-__init, or something else? > > {time passes, he looks] > > OK, I looked at include/linux/init.h. From what I can see > there, __setup() causes an .init.setup section to be emitted, > so marking __setup() function as __init would make sense. > I think that this patch is good. i saw that ide_setup() is __init as a bunch of lots others. yes init.h confirms that. :) -- maks kernel janitor http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/ - 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/