Messages in this thread | | | From | "Adam J. Richter" <> | Date | Thu, 20 Feb 2003 05:51:50 -0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC] Is an alternative module interface needed/possible? |
| |
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Roman Zippel wrote: >On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Adam J. Richter wrote:
>> The ability to remove a module is generally independent of >> whether or not there is any hardware present at that moment for which >> the module supplies a driver. Instead, the determining issue is >> whether there are file descriptors open for that driver.
>I don't understand, what you're trying to say. >File descriptors are not the only way to access a driver and the ability >to remove a module is only dependent on the number of references to this >module.
You're right. My second sentence was an oversimplification. I should have said "software references" rather than file descriptors to include things like "ifconfig eth0 up" creating a reference, mounting a block device creating a refernece, etc. (Perhaps I should have stated only my first sentence and stopped there.)
Anyhow, my point is that removing a piece of hardware does not require that the corresponding module be unloaded immediately.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Milpitas, California 95035 +1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America "Free Software For The Rest Of Us." - 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/
| |