Messages in this thread |  | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: Question about pseudo filesystems | Date | Mon, 9 Sep 2002 22:12:28 +0200 |
| |
On Monday 09 September 2002 21:48, Jamie Lokier wrote: > The expected behaviour is as it has always been: rmmod fails if anyone > is using the module, and succeeds if nobody is using the module. The > garbage collection of modules is done using "rmmod -a" periodically, as > it always has been.
When you say 'rmmod modulename' the module is supposed to be removed, if it can be. That is the user's expectation, and qualifies as 'obviously correct'.
Garbage collecting should *not* be the primary mechanism for removing modules, that is what rmmod is for. Neither should a filesystem module magically disappear from the system just because the last mount went away, unless the module writer very specifically desires that. This is where the obfuscating opinion is coming from: Al has come up with an application where he wants the magic disappearing behavior and wants to impose it on the rest of the world, regardless of whether it makes sense.
-- 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/
|  |