From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752812AbXDPOvj (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:51:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754102AbXDPOvi (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:51:38 -0400 Received: from server225-han.de-nserver.de ([85.158.176.91]:33041 "EHLO server225-han.de-nserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752812AbXDPOvi (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:51:38 -0400 Message-ID: <46238D75.4010409@codemercs.com> Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:51:33 +0200 From: Robert Marquardt User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Stern CC: Cornelia Huck , Tejun Heo , Markus Rechberger , USB development list , Kernel development list Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] How should an exit routine wait for release() callbacks? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-User-Auth: Auth by marquardt@codemercs.com through 87.187.10.176 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Stern wrote: > On the other hand, this proposal involves adding a fair amount of overhead > (all those .owner fields) for a rather small benefit. And it involves > modifying a core kernel subsystem (kernel/module.c). All to prevent > certain unlikely sorts of errors when removing a module -- something which > Linus has said repeatedly need not be supported terribly well. > > So I'm uncertain whether other people will be in favor of all this. I think Linus is in error here. Either do it right or not at all. I would say that modules should work *always* and without any conceptual problem.