Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932218AbWB1Pa6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:30:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932219AbWB1Pa6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:30:58 -0500 Received: from smtp102.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.36.80]:13479 "HELO smtp102.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932218AbWB1Pa5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:30:57 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:Subject:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Mime-Version:X-Mailer:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=SN5lM9Z5ik+kaLgz9BSlQTQrIAZZdqsZY3xarXtdtJeAaAKo6yXfz2aeF5ZOyDKQxrhtnNiQY826WAt05NCOPQ1UVGW/jZPUmzZ8TwJwuVCKrXzWpQQNZDIUyhFYeDXA+uEmDCQ8ARPk7VJ0npdRzHmkWMffZmGZNDT8pCmpJH0= ; Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool From: "James C. Georgas" To: Jan-Benedict Glaw Cc: Adrian Bunk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060228145217.GM19232@lug-owl.de> References: <20060225160150.GX3674@stusta.de> <1141078686.28136.20.camel@Rainsong.home> <20060228145217.GM19232@lug-owl.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:30:51 -0500 Message-Id: <1141140654.11504.25.camel@Tachyon.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1445 Lines: 32 On a philosophical note, I like being able to unload a module and replace it at runtime, without having to reboot. I might want to play around with the code in a module, for educational purposes, and being able to reload an altered module makes a huge difference in how quickly I can test my changes. Also, I suspect that if the modular option were removed then eventually the code would evolve to a state where it would be impossible to reinstate the option (i.e. the driver would become tightly coupled to other kernel code). There have been drivers in the past that would not build as modules, because they made the assumption that their dependencies were built into the kernel. A good example is the old 2.4 kernel IDE stuff, where the IDE disk driver would barf on compilation if the IDE base driver was built as a module instead of compiled into the kernel. I guess it just gives me the creeps to think that we're setting up conditions that would allow tight coupling of drivers to arise once again. Of course, I'm not an expert or anything. What /are/ the disadvantages to having a modular driver, as opposed to having it built in to the kernel? -- James C. Georgas - 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/