Hi!
> 1. The best case: an init function calls a non-init, which in
> turn calls an init:
>
> void __init probe() { a(); }
> void a() { b(); }
> void __init b() { ... }
> in this case, is the missing __init on 'a' only a performance
>
Rusty Russell writes:
> It's incredibly poor taste, though, and if we ever implement __init
> dropping for modules (Keith?),
Jakub Jelinek implemented this about 2 years ago, right before
we hit 2.2.x, Linus thought it was too late at the time so
we dropped that work from our trees.
It was re
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> where if you look in the code, the flagged routine generic_NCR53C400A_setup
> does indeed not have __init:
> void generic_NCR53C400A_setup (char *str, int *ints) {
> internal_setup (BOARD_NCR53C400A, str, ints);
> }
As long as
as per a suggestion from Jonathan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) I wrote a simple
checker to warn when non-__init functions call __init functions or use
__initdata. Before sending the entire list of "bugs" I want to make
sure they actually are errors rather than bugs in how I understand the
kernel. So, as
4 matches
Mail list logo
