Re: [OKS] Module removal

From: Oliver Neukum (oliver@neukum.name)
Date: Mon Jul 08 2002 - 01:42:14 EST


> Catching the entry points is what the current `try_inc_mod_count' code
> does. I can't think of another way to do that.

The old way "2.2-rules" are safe on UP without preempt. So if you
temporarily, through the freeze hack, can introduce these conditions,
you've solved it. Except that you need to deal with a failure due to
an elevated usage count.

IMHO you gain very little by finding partial solutions which won't
help you in the hard cases. Module unload is very rare. It just needs
to work. You need to optimise use of modules, not the unload.
Strictly speaking, by having owner fields you punish drivers compiled
statically. The effect is small and not worth doing something about
it, but it should show the direction.

        Regards
                Oliver

-
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 : Mon Jul 15 2002 - 22:00:12 EST