Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 12:31:38 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: davidg@Root.COM, terry@artisoft.com Cc: hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org, julian@freefall.FreeBSD.org, terry@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Terry's changes.. Message-ID: <199508290231.MAA25986@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>The SYSINIT stuff is about as conflicting as the PSEUDO_SET stuff for >statically installed pseudo-devices. It trades the ability to linearly >read down the init_main.c (which is unclear anyway because of the >startinit return after fork returning to the calling assembly instead >of calling an assembly routine at the ens of startinit) for the ability >to linearly look down the header file kernel.h for gross initialization >order. It also allows dropping in of binary modules, and because of the Couldn't some of it have stayed as direct function calls? It seems excessive to use an init function just to print the copyright (I had to introduce one because printf has the wrong type for an init function). I want to initialize clock interrupts earlier. This requires moving at least part of initclocks() to machine-dependent code and initializing curproc = &proc0 later. I don't want any non-determinism in the order for this. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199508290231.MAA25986>