What is the primary objective here - getting rid of #ifdef MODULE, or is
it removing redundant code for the two paths? Or both?
I am just trying to get a handle on what is driving this.
-Eric
----- Original Message -----
From: "Linus Torvalds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Torben Mathiasen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Eric Youngdale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: SCSI scanning
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Torben Mathiasen wrote:
> >
> > Thanks a lot. I've started to do the basics, like getting all subsystems
to work
> > with the module_init/exit stuff. This of course leds to some
rewriteting/restructuring
> > of the scsi layer. Nothing major though.
>
> Actually, hold off a moment.
>
> It turns out that the MODULE case does all the right things, for all the
> obvious reasons. I'm running a kernel that has the #ifdef MODULE stuff
> just removed, and it seems to be a rather easy approach. It really only
> required making a few things static (the init routines would clash
> otherwise), and removing a lot of #ifdef MODULE.
>
> (And removing some code that was enabled only for non-modules).
>
> It looks very straightforward.
>
> Linus
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
