On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 03:01:43PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 21:49:33 +0100
> Thomas Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > * Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-13 20:12
> > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 05:17:56PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure whether that is important any longer. It probably isn't,
> > > > but we should verify it before applying such a patch.
> > >
> > > There might be practical considerations along the lines of "we want
> > > lookups for loopback to be fast"...
> >
> > What is this discussion actually about? Since we started registering
> > devices directly hooked into the init process before device_initcall()
> > the order is random. Even the bonding device is registered before the
> > loopback.
>
> Loopback should be there before protocols are started. It makes sense
> to have a standard startup order.
This actually becomes easier after my patch:
Now that it's untangled from net_olddevs_init(), you can simply change
the module_init(loopback_init) to a different initcall level.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
