Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 9 Jul 2002 07:45:45 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Richard B. Johnson" <> | Subject | Re: Driverfs updates |
| |
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Thunder from the hill wrote:
> Hi, > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > -It is slow. > > I wouldn't call it any fast when I think about the idea that 31 of my CPUs > on Hawkeye shall be stopped because I unload a module. Sometimes at high > noon my server (Hawkeye) can hardly keep up all the traffic. Just imagine > a module would be unloaded then! That's the problem I'm having with it. > > What should make a lock for parts of the kernel slower than a lock for > the _whole_ kernel? > > Regards, > Thunder
The module unload is to be used only during module development (so you don't have to re-boot), as was the very first conjecture in this thread.
The current 'auto-unload' in some distributions like RedHat will go away. The only way a module will be unloaded is if you, as root, unload it.
Cheers, Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.18 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Windows-2000/Professional isn't.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |