Messages in this thread | | | From | "Adam J. Richter" <> | Date | Wed, 15 Jan 2003 00:46:26 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Proposed module init race fix. |
| |
On 2003-01-15, Rusty Russell wrote: >It's possible to start using a module, and then have it fail >initialization. In 2.4, this resulted in random behaviour. One >solution to this is to make all interfaces two-stage: reserve >everything you need (which might fail), the activate them. This >means changing about 1600 modules, and deprecating every interface >they use.
Could you explain this "random behavior" of 2.4 a bit more? As far as I know, if a module's init function fails, it must unregister everything that it has registered up to that point.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Milpitas, California 95035 +1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."
- 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/
| |