| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:54:21 +0400 From: Igor Zhbanov <izh1979@...il.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Why module_exit() is void and not int? What about can_unload()? Hello! Sometimes module doesn't want to be unloaded. But now the only way to prevent unloading (except hanging in module_exit()) is incrementing of module usage count. But sometimes module couldn't know whether it is a good time for unload, and can check a condition only in module_exit() handler. But it is impossible to return error (something like EAGAIN), since module_exit() is void. Why not to have int module_exit()? Or some other way to tell the kernel at module_exit() time that module cannot be unloaded? -- 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