Re: Linux 2.5.64

Dave Jones
2003-03-06T00:31:57Z

On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 01:06:37AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:

> > Only the bits that did the module locking crap, which
> > is unnecessary afaics. If you look at the files touched,
> > there's still nowayout used in the other functions.
>
> You need to lock the module in memory in the nowayout case
> Otherwise the module can be unloaded (which is ok), and then
> reloaded (which is not).
>
> So yes, you broke NOWAYOUT. Its a bit subtle and under
> documented I admit.

Bugger. Ok, I'll add that to the TODO.

Dave

--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs