public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Werner Almesberger <wa@almesberger.net>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, kronos@kronoz.cjb.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Is an alternative module interface needed/possible?
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:20:32 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030227102032.K2092@almesberger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302271321190.1336-100000@serv>; from zippel@linux-m68k.org on Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 01:34:18PM +0100

Roman Zippel wrote:
> There are several module interfaces:
> - module user interface
> - module load interface
> - module driver interface

Hmm, the "load interface" would be the system calls, while
the "driver interface" would be initialization and cleanup
functions in the module ?

We've already established that most things called from the
latter isn't actually module specific.

> These are quite independent and so far we were talking about the last one, 
> so I'm a bit confused about your request to talk about the first.

I'm not so sure about them being independent. E.g. if we
just had a blocking single-phase cleanup, users would always
see success, but resources may be tied up indefinitely, which
would break uses like

rmmod foo
insmod foo.o

On the other hand, with a non-blocking two-phase cleanup, users
would still always see success, but only "anonymous" resources
(memory, etc.) would be tied up.

Last but not least, a non-blocking single-phase cleanup would
expose all failures to the user, and require some retry strategy.

Furthermore, use counts can have several meanings:
 - indicate when it's convenient for the module to be removed
 - indicate when it's possible for the module to be removed
 - indicate what consequences the user may experience if
   trying to remove now (e.g. blocking)

The "old" module count was a bit of a mixture of the first two.
The "new" count is clearer.

Oh, lest I be misunderstood: I'm not saying that we should
redesign everything, and screw compatibility. I just want to
bring the hidden assumptions that have piled up over the life
of the module system out in the open.

Then, of course, there are still plenty of opportunities to
plot any massive breakage ;-)

- Werner

-- 
  _________________________________________________________________________
 / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina         wa@almesberger.net /
/_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/

  reply	other threads:[~2003-02-27 13:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-02 22:50 [RFC] Migrating net/sched to new module interface Kronos
2003-01-03  5:10 ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-03  8:37   ` David S. Miller
2003-01-04  6:09     ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-04 16:21       ` Kronos
2003-01-13 22:32   ` kuznet
2003-01-13 23:23     ` Max Krasnyansky
2003-01-14 17:49     ` Kronos
2003-01-15  0:21       ` Roman Zippel
2003-01-15  1:19         ` kuznet
2003-01-15  7:31           ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-15  8:16             ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-15  9:33               ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16  1:12                 ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-16  2:42                   ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16  3:31                     ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-16  4:20                       ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16  4:25                       ` David S. Miller
2003-01-16  4:49                         ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16 16:05                         ` Roman Zippel
2003-01-16 18:15                     ` Roman Zippel
2003-01-16 18:58                       ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16 23:53                         ` Roman Zippel
2003-01-17  1:04                           ` Greg KH
2003-01-17  2:27                     ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-17 21:40                       ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-13 23:16                       ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-14  1:57                         ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-14  3:44                           ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-14 11:16                           ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-14 12:04                             ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-14 12:49                               ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-17  1:59                                 ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-17 10:53                                   ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-17 23:31                                     ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-18 12:26                                       ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-14 13:21                               ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-14 13:53                                 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-14 14:24                                   ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-14 18:30                                     ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-14 20:09                                       ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-15  0:12                                         ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-15  0:51                                           ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-15  2:28                                             ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-15 23:20                                               ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-17 17:04                                                 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-17 23:09                                                   ` [RFC] Is an alternative module interface needed/possible? Roman Zippel
2003-02-18  1:18                                                     ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-18  4:54                                                       ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-18  7:20                                                         ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-18 12:06                                                           ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-18 14:12                                                             ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-18 12:45                                                               ` Thomas Molina
2003-02-18 17:22                                                               ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-19  3:30                                                                 ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-19  4:11                                                                   ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-19 23:38                                                                     ` Rusty Russell
2003-02-20  9:46                                                                       ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-20  0:40                                                                 ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-20  2:17                                                                   ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-23 16:02                                                                     ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-26 23:26                                                                       ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-27 12:34                                                                         ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-27 13:20                                                                           ` Werner Almesberger [this message]
2003-02-27 14:33                                                                             ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-23 23:34                                                                 ` Kevin O'Connor
2003-02-24 12:14                                                                   ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-18 12:35                                                           ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-18 14:14                                                             ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-19  1:48                                                       ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-19  2:27                                                         ` Werner Almesberger
2003-01-16 13:44                   ` [RFC] Migrating net/sched to new module interface Roman Zippel
2003-01-15 17:04               ` Roman Zippel
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-20 12:09 [RFC] Is an alternative module interface needed/possible? Adam J. Richter
2003-02-20 12:46 ` Roman Zippel
2003-02-20 13:51 Adam J. Richter
2003-02-20 14:06 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-02-20 15:38 ` Roman Zippel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030227102032.K2092@almesberger.net \
    --to=wa@almesberger.net \
    --cc=kronos@kronoz.cjb.net \
    --cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox