Re: [PATCH] Module alias and device table support.

From: Arnd Bergmann (arnd@bergmann-dalldorf.de)
Date: Sat Feb 01 2003 - 05:36:34 EST


Kai Germaschewski wrote:

> Alright. I think we're heading towards a generic postprocessor here, which
> takes the .o, extracts information as necessary and generates some .c file
> which contains e.g. checksums for the unresolved symbols (when MODVERSIONS
> is selected), a section to record which modules we depend on, an alias
> section etc. This .c is then compiled and linked into the final .ko
...
> Yup, I think modversions should have a little time to settle first.
> There's really only one tricky point with modversions (and the other stuff
> above), i.e. we need a complete list of all modules. With people
> playing tricks with "make SUBDIRS=..." that needs some care to not go
> accidentally wrong.

Worse that "make SUBDIRS=...", what do you think can be done about third
party modules? After all, I thought they are what modversions are about.
I don't see how you can reliably find the list of required modules when
you build a module outside of the kernel tree.

        Arnd <><
-
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 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:08 EST