[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801290052100.1185@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:54:22 +0100 (CET)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Module: check to see if we have a built in module
with the same name
On Jan 27 2008 15:38, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>Subject: [PATCH 3/5] Module: check to see if we have a built in module with the
> same name
>
>When trying to load a module with the same name as a built-in one, a
>scary kobject backtrace comes up. Prevent that from checking for this
>condition and warning the user as to what exactly is going on.
Should not external modules with internal names be rejected at modprobe
time? Otherwise I'd wonder how you want to deal with /sys/modules/XXX if
both modules export some module_param()s.
It's just that if I happen to load vt.ko that the existing
/sys/modules/vt (from in-kernel vt.o) does not get overwritten by new
dentries that vt.ko will spawn. Something like /sys/modules/vt.1 perhaps
for /the new module with same name?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists