[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803201635.30795.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:35:30 +1100
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] Markers Support for Proprierary Modules
On Thursday 20 March 2008 11:27:41 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> There seems to be good arguments for markers to support proprierary
> modules. So I am throwing this one-liner in and let's see how people react.
> It only makes sure that a module that has been "forced" to be loaded won't
> have its markers used. It is important to leave this check to make sure the
> kernel does not crash by expecting the markers part of the struct module by
> mistake in the case there is an incorrect checksum.
OK, I've applied this to my tree. That means it will be in 2.6.26 unless you
want me to push it earlier.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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