1 |
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 15:55:36 -0700 |
2 |
"Dmitri Pogosyan" <pogosyan@×××××××××××××.ca> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Absence of autounloading is not a property of gentoo, but of recent |
5 |
> kernels. Somewhere along Linux people decided that unloading unused |
6 |
> modules is not that useful :( |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Am I right, actually ? |
9 |
|
10 |
As I remember it was decided that it could be dangerous to allow |
11 |
module unloading. The main problem was that of potential for race |
12 |
conditions. For example a programme might be using a device when |
13 |
another one unloaded it. Usage counts were meant to prevent this, but |
14 |
were considered unreliable. As a result the ability to unload modules |
15 |
is now a configurable option in the kernel, along with forced unloading. |
16 |
|
17 |
-- |
18 |
Ian. |
19 |
|
20 |
EOM |
21 |
-- |
22 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |