[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4DBA9C71020000780003EDBE@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:09:37 +0100
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Michal Marek" <mmarek@...e.cz>
Cc: <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
<bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, <jeffm@...e.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: Module use count must be updated as
bridges are created/destroyed
>>> On 29.04.11 at 10:44, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:31:27 +0100
>
>>>>> On 29.04.11 at 10:10, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>> From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:41:10 +0100
>>>
>>>> You talk of rmmod on the very module, but the issue is about
>>>> modprobe -r on a dependent module. I cannot believe you consider
>>>> it correct that *implicit* unloading of bridge.ko should happen when
>>>> bridges are configured.
>>>
>>> Which module in particular depends upon bridge and causes the
>>> problem?
>>
>> The problem was observed (a long time ago) with ebtable_broute,
>> and I cannot see how this would have changed meanwhile.
>
> Well your change makes it so that someone who actually _wants_ to
> unload the bridge module, regardless of configuration, cannot do so.
>
> I think that's a worse problem than this ebtables thing.
>
> Nothing on the system should be hitting modules with unload requests
> unless the user explicitly asked for that specific module to be
> unloaded. At least not by default.
>
> So the me the problem is perhaps that "modprobe -r" does this auto
> dependency unloading thing by default.
>
> When we first fixed network device drivers so that they now properly
> always run with no module refcount at all, people complained because
> there were some distributions that ran some daemon that periodically
> looked for "unreferenced" modules and "helped" the user by
> automatically unloaded them.
>
> We killed that foolish daemon, and we can fix "modprobe -r" too.
Michal - aren't you the modutils maintainer? What are your thoughts
here? (The original report we got is
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=267651.)
> Does "rmmod" have this behavior too? If not, and it does the right
> thing by only unloaded what the user asked for, then people should
> use that.
No, it doesn't. Other than modprobe, rmmod deals only with the
module specified.
> I really don't in any way want to block people from being able to
> cleanly unload the bridge module, regardless of configuration, if
> that's what they want so your patch as written is not going to be
> considered for inclusion.
I understood that meanwhile, yet fail to see an alternative solution
(imo this auto-unloading is quite desirable in other cases).
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists