Messages in this thread |  | | From | Keith Owens <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4 Status / TODO page (Updated as of 2.4.0-test10) | Date | Mon, 06 Nov 2000 11:47:30 +1100 |
| |
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000 23:15:27 +0000 (GMT), David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: >Your patch looks like it'll work. Although I don't really see any >advantage over {get,put}_module_symbol() in this case, it does look like >it can be used to finally provide module persistent storage, which will be >useful.
Cleanliness. All other module data flows go via explicit symbols which are fixed up at link time or via registration functions. Having a few sources that use a third mechanism which forces people to use EXPORT_SYMBOL_NOVERS() to make it work is messy and redundant.
I'm not sure why you think this can be used for module persistent storage. If a module calls inter_module_register() on load, it should call inter_module_unregister() on unload. All the registered data points into the loaded module, remove the module and the storage disappears as well.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |