In message <3A068025.38D62785@uow.edu.au> you write:
> Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > - extern void ether_setup(struct net_device *dev);
> > + extern void __ether_setup(struct net_device *dev);
> > + static inline void ether_setup(struct net_device *dev){
> > + dev->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > + __ether_setup(dev);
> > + }
> >
> > Ugh. Probably should just add it to each probe and be done with it...
>
> mm.. Seeing as failure to set dev->owner is a fatal mistake,
> it would be good to enforce this via the compiler type system.
>
> How about making THIS_MODULE an argument to register_netdevice()
> and, hence, register_netdev() and init_etherdev()?
Bear in mind that in 2.5, the THIS_MODULE registration cancer
infesting the kernel[1] will vanish with two-stage module delete[2].
http://www.wcug.wwu.edu/lists/netdev/200006/msg00250.html
Rusty.
[1] And getting worse.
[2] Which was the correct solution for 2.4, only I was all out of
`get out of code freeze free' cards.
-- Hacking time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 21:00:24 EST