In message <20030725104738.7ffbc118.davem@redhat.com> you write:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 04:00:18 +1000
> Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
>
> > If module removal is to be a rare and unusual event, it
> > doesn't seem so sensible to go to great lengths in the code to handle
> > just that case. In fact, it's easier to leave the module memory in
> > place, and not have the concept of parts of the kernel text (and some
> > types of kernel data) vanishing.
> >
> > Polite feedback welcome,
>
> I'm ok with this, with one possible enhancement.
>
> How about we make ->cleanup() return a boolean, which if true
> causes the caller to do the module_free()?
Some "I am the perfect module" flag would probably cause less
breakage. But, I'm not sure even that is worth it.
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 22:00:33 EST