[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50F6DD4D.3070808@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:03:09 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@...il.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module, async: async_synchronize_full() on module init
iff async is used
> As Arjan suggested, trying to load the default modules right after the
> initial rootfs mount could be an acceptable compromise and it would be
> really nice (for both code sanity and avoiding future problems) to be
> able to declare module loading nested inside async unspported.
we can even try twice
the first time right after we mount the initramfs
the second time when the initramfs code exits, and before we exec init
(the initramfs supposedly mounted the real root fs at this point)
if you want your elevator to apply to your root filesystem storage, the rule
will then be "put the module in the initramfs"... but to be honest,
that's not a restriction that is unreasonable or unexpected.
for doing a module loading from inside an async handler..we can then just make
use of the normal "load this module async" way of requesting a module.
--
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