Re: Little question about modules...

From: David Ford (david+nospam@killerlabs.com)
Date: Sun Jan 07 2001 - 07:11:40 EST

Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Previous message: David S. Miller: "Re: [little bit OT] ip _IS_ _NOT_ ifconfig and route ! (was Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!))"
In reply to: Keith Owens: "Re: Little question about modules..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote:
> If the module controls its own unloading via a can_unload routine
> then the user count displayed by lsmod is always -1, irrespective of
> the real use count.

Maybe lsmod can show a blank for the field and (auto unload). That'd
probably draw a lot less "my module is broken" reports.

-d

-- ---NOTICE--- fwd: fwd: fwd: type emails will be deleted automatically. "There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents", Thomas Jefferson [1742-1826], 3rd US President

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Previous message: David S. Miller: "Re: [little bit OT] ip _IS_ _NOT_ ifconfig and route ! (was Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!))"
In reply to: Keith Owens: "Re: Little question about modules..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:27 EST