From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Subject: Re: changeset: Make forced module loading optional
Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 22:05:51 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805042159230.32269@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200805051455.02723.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> I'm trying to figure out how you did this. So fedora builds unversioned
> modules, and version (and vermagic) matched your kernel? And you somehow
> mixed them up?
I don't use modules much, so many of my kernels tend to have modules off
entirely. However, the Intel wireless drivers used to not work when
built-in (fixed now, but I still had a legacy config), so my laptop had
modules enabled, and MODVERSIONS set.
And I don't build initrd's etc crap, very much on purpose. I want to
replace the kernel, nothing else, so my /etc/grub.conf file just replaces
the distro kernel with my own, and keeps everything else untouched.
> I don't think relying on modversions is the complete answer here. Perhaps
> we should make modules_install blow away old modules?
Wouldn't help one whit, and is against my rules anyway. See above. I want
my own kernel, no other changes. That means that I run the distro initrd,
which has its modules for bringing stuff up with distro kernels.
And quite frankly, when I finally figured out what was going on, I was
like *WHAT THE HELL*. That kernel/module.c code was absolute and utter
crap in accepting modules that neither matched the kernel version
signature (because it had CONFIG_MODVERSIONS) *nor* the actual versioned
symbols (because the distro modules had been built without
CONFIG_MODVERSIONS).
So no, I'm not at all interested in blowing away old modules. I'm
interested in having a module loader that isn't complete and utter crap
and bypasses all the sanity checks that it has.
Which is what that changeset basically does.
People can still set CONFIG_MODULE_LOAD_FORCE, but quite frankly, I
suspect that anybody who does that is just insane and/or works with
proprietary and broken modules. So it's off by default, and hopefully no
distro will ever set it.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-05 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-05 4:55 Rusty Russell
2008-05-05 5:05 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2008-05-05 5:35 ` Rusty Russell
2008-05-05 17:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-05 18:42 ` Rusty Russell
2008-05-05 19:47 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 6:43 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-05-05 14:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-05 14:50 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-05-05 15:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-05 15:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-05 15:32 ` Dave Jones
2008-05-05 15:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-05 16:01 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-05-05 15:57 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-05 6:35 ` Jan Engelhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.1.10.0805042159230.32269@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jonathan@jonmasters.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®