[lkml]   [1997]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Subjectsysctl and modules question (was: Re: binfmt_misc)

    On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

    > > > Note that it is possible and useful to operate as a statically loaded
    > > > module as well, for which case kerneld doesn't matter.
    > > >
    > > Use of kerneld is not usefull (since we will loose our configuration
    > > every minute...). Is it really usefull to add a module statically!?
    > > (Well, if one does really need this, I'll fix it)
    > Yes it is! When you have to manage hundreds of machines, you don't
    > want to have to customize the kernel for every machine, but adding
    > modules at runtime is doable.
    Ok, I agree with you. I tried to include module support and the following
    problem arised:

    I use the sysctl interface to configure binfmt_misc, so changed
    kernel/sysctl.c and include/linux/sysctl.h accordingly. The problem now is,
    what do I have to do in the module case? I probably have to register my
    sysctl-interface dynamically via register_sysctl_table!? So I have to add
    a complete new table, not just an entry? This seems to be ugly.
    Or is there a way to get binfmt_misc loaded, if somebody does actually
    call the sysctl-interface (the entry in the table is always there)? How
    do I need to mark the pointer to the sysctl-handler that this works?
    (I sawed something about a fault-table in kernel/module.c - how can I
    use this?)

    If anybody can help with this, please do so!


     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.017 / U:90.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site