lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] init_module: update to modern interfaces
Hi Rusty,

Thanks for the review! One open question below.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> writes:
>> [CC widened, so that some more review might come in. Rusty?]
>
> Sure.
>
> Looks good. but:
>
>> .B EBUSY
>> The module's initialization routine failed.
>
> Possibly. You should mention that the individual module's
> initialization routine can return other errors as appropriate.

Done!

In fact, the existing EBUSY text seems completely bogus. Should it not
read something like
"Timeout while trying to resolve a symbol reference by this module."?

>> .BR EINVAL " (Linux 2.4 and earlier)"
>> Some
>> .I image
>> slot is filled in incorrectly,
>> .I image\->name
>> does not correspond to the original module name, some
>> .I image\->deps
>> entry does not correspond to a loaded module,
>> or some other similar inconsistency.
>> .TP
>
> Why document this?

Because the general approach in man-pages is to document past as well
as current behavior. Since there are few user-space customers of
init_module(), perhaps you are right that this is unnecessary. I
dropped it.

>> .B ENOEXEC
>> The ELF image in
>> .I module_image
>> is too small or has corrupted segments.
>
> Or is not an ELF image, or wrong arch...

Yes, reworded here.

[...]

> You might want to note that the 2.4 syscall can be detected by calling
> query_module(): 2.6 and above give ENOSYS.

Done.

Thanks,

Michael

--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-10-12 10:21    [W:0.120 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site