Keith Owens wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 15:48:17 +0200,
> Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >Keith Owens wrote
> >> Modules can run their own kernel threads. When the module shuts down
> >> it terminates the threads but we must wait until the process entries
> >> for the threads have been reaped. If you are not careful, the zombie
> >> clean up code can refer to the module that no longer exists. You must
> >> not freeze any threads that belong to the module.
I am just out to share a possible angle. -all though not really a programmer.
Can one module replace another -running- twin-module without having to hand-
shake with the kernel? -and without freezing ? (transparently)
If obvious no - no need to read further.
Otherwhise, there might be a possibility to create a shut-down module out of
the existing module it self?
In this case it could probably be a smooth solution to ask the module creator.
(if known, and available) if he/she would be able to make this modification
on the fly, as he/she probably knows the most about how the signals operate.
That is to strip down the existing loadable module into sort of a dummy.
Of course this won't work if hazardous removal issues are shared among all or
most of the existing kernel modules.
An apology for taking up time and bandwith. But rmmod is such a neat command
to have a round.
/Daniel Mose
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 07 2002 - 22:00:18 EST