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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 22:00:53 EST