lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Proposed module init race fix.
Date
In message <200301150846.AAA01104@adam.yggdrasil.com> you write:
> 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.

And if someone's using it, the module gets unloaded underneath them.

Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.031 / U:1.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site