Messages in this thread | | | From | warlord@mit ... | Date | Fri, 20 Sep 1996 16:50:32 -0400 | Subject | Re: modules problems |
| |
> > The problem still to be fixed is a way to differentiate modules compiled > > for SMP and those for non-SMP. Working on it! > > Another $0.02 idea ... would changing the OS type from "Linux" to > "Linux-SMP" hurt anything? It sure would be easy to detect a SMP > kernel this way.
Why not just make all the exported kernel interfaces the same whether the kernel is single processor or SMP? You shouldn't need to have multiple modules for kernels with different configurations. The fact that modules need to be recompiled based upon the kernel configuration is a bug.
Basically, exported kernel interfaces should be independent of the kernel configuration. The only thing that should affect exported kernel interfaces is the kernel version and any patches that may have been applied. Otherwise, a module compiled for version X.Y.Z of the Linux kernel should work with any configuration of X.Y.Z, provided that the required interfaces are there (for example, NFS as a module requires filesystem and networking support to be there).
Modules should only need to determine if a kernel is SMP for locking (or threading) issues. There shouldn't be any need to recompile a module for SMP machines, if kernel interfaces are defined properly.
As someone who has to support a binary-only kernel module (AFS), this requirement really strains my resources. So, not only do I need to recompile the module for differences in the kernel version, but I also have to recompile for various configurations as well! Uggh.
-derek
| |