[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:0.042 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site