Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:24:53 -0400 | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [patch 4/4] Markers Support for Proprierary Modules |
| |
* Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote: > > * Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes: > > [...] > > > [if the proprietary modules attach to kernel markers ...] then all > > > the pressure is on those who _can_ fix their code - meaning the > > > kernel subsystem maintainers that use [you mean: define] markers. > > > > (In a way, it would be a nice problem to have. At this moment, there > > are still no markers actually committed within -mm nor -linus.) > > ... which makes it doubly problematic to expose them to binary-only > modules in any way, shape or form. Really, once _any_ kernel facility is > used by such a module, it's pain for us to change it from that point on. > Once markers are a 10 year concept that nobody in their right mind would > want to change, sure, we dont _care_ about whether it's export or not, > and basic courtesy might say that it's OK to do it. But to proactively > export any aspect of a half-done piece of infrastructure is crazy. > > Ingo
I agree with you on this : maybe it would be better to wait a bit and let the core markers in first and learn from that before we open this up to proprierary modules.
Mathieu
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
| |