On Friday 13 September 2002 16:33, Thunder from the hill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > Because in your example, my_module_start() would not be able to run
> > > separately
> >
> > That's obvious. What hasn't been shown is why that's necessary.
>
> Yeah, but it was also obvious that my_module_init() can fail this way.
> Look, first we watch the module initialization, that is, we run the
> critical stuff like resource allocation, data structure allocation, etc.
> If we fail here, we can't load the module, because it would be unoperative
> if we proceed. (Because the data simply isn't there.)
>
> And possibly Rusty wanted to avoid a certain race, which is unrelated to
> school and kids. Once we've initialized, the module can be used, earlier
> is balderdash.
On the face of it, your post is content-free. To redeem yourself,
please identify the race Rusty avoided and show how I did not avoid
the same race.
-- Daniel - 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 Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:33 EST