Re: Ответ: Ответ: Ответ: MODPROBE: next generation

[Denys Vlasenko]

[CC: busybox ml. ARGH]

2008/7/10 Vladimir Dronnikov <dronnikov at gmail.com>:
>>> Tell this to somebody who will be bitten by depmod -F System.map -ae
>>> 2.6.30 not working as expected during kernel build.
>
> FEATURE_DESKTOP_OPTIONS should control whether to support -Fae, right?

Maybe. -Fae support costs something like 20 bytes.

>>> If /lib/modules are read-only and depfile is not present,
>>> it scans entire module directory, including every module's body.
>>> Even if it is asked to load a module which can be found by filename.
>
> So what? The gain of looking straight into module file isn't so big as it
> might seem.

As opposed to looking into each and every module body?

> Those who has /lib/modules RO should depmod prior to making
> their root filesystem or should not complain of they can't write to their RO
> filesystem.

I liked the idea of not needing depfile at all and still
being reasonably fast. And it's actually YOUR idea -
I based my work on your depfile-less patch.

> Again, it should be left to user to make a choice.
> FEATURE_MODPROBE_FAST_AS_A_LIGHTNING?

I am planning to make depfile generation optional -
there may be people who don't care about modprobe speed
or they always modprobe modules by name, not alias
(by name is fast).

But first I want to be sure that full-blown
(all options on) version works for desktop users.
--
vda

> I posted messages concerning regexps in mdev, many people
> argued saying: "if you want more then use udev". Now it seems as opposite
> situation...

Yes, people are different. I am slightly less paranoid
about size but want more compat and want busybox be usable
on the desktop. Don't like to be a niche product.
--
vda

>
> Where am I wrong, Denys?
>
> TIA,
>
> --
>
> Vladimir
>