Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 02:22:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 02:22:29 -0400 Received: from dsl-213-023-043-185.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.43.185]:58509 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 02:22:28 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Jamie Lokier , Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: [OKS] Module removal Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 08:22:28 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Werner Almesberger , Keith Owens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20020707220933.B11999@kushida.apsleyroad.org> <20020708014626.B13387@kushida.apsleyroad.org> In-Reply-To: <20020708014626.B13387@kushida.apsleyroad.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 901 Lines: 23 On Monday 08 July 2002 02:46, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Bill Davidsen wrote: > > I think you have to do it with the use count, and there may well be > > modules you can't remove safely. > > I agree, this is the correct and clean thing to do. > > It rather implies that any function in a module which calls > MOD_{INC,DEC}_USE_COUNT should always be called from a non-module > function which _itself_ protects the module from removal by temporarily > bumping the use count. That's not nice. It requires the calling code to know it's calling a module and it imposes the inc/dec overhead on callers even when the target isn't compiled as a module. -- Daniel - 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/