Re: [PATCH] init_module: update to modern interfaces

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

Hi Rusty,

Thanks for the review! One open question below.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> [CC widened, so that some more review might come in. Rusty?]
>
> Sure.
>
> Looks good. but:
>
>> .B EBUSY
>> The module's initialization routine failed.
>
> Possibly.  You should mention that the individual module's
> initialization routine can return other errors as appropriate.

Done!

In fact, the existing EBUSY text seems completely bogus. Should it not
read something like
"Timeout while trying to resolve a symbol reference by this module."?

>> .BR EINVAL " (Linux 2.4 and earlier)"
>> Some
>> .I image
>> slot is filled in incorrectly,
>> .I image\->name
>> does not correspond to the original module name, some
>> .I image\->deps
>> entry does not correspond to a loaded module,
>> or some other similar inconsistency.
>> .TP
>
> Why document this?

Because the general approach in man-pages is to document past as well
as current behavior. Since there are few user-space customers of
init_module(), perhaps you are right that this is unnecessary. I
dropped it.

>> .B ENOEXEC
>> The ELF image in
>> .I module_image
>> is too small or has corrupted segments.
>
> Or is not an ELF image, or wrong arch...

Yes, reworded here.

[...]

> You might want to note that the 2.4 syscall can be detected by calling
> query_module(): 2.6 and above give ENOSYS.

Done.

Thanks,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/