Re: query_modules syscall gone? Any replacement?

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, iSteve wrote:

> Okay, so, I have so far gathered:
>
>   - the whole module interface change between 2.4 and 2.6 was because
> some security concerns, most of the stuff (loading module etc.) moved
> towards kernel

I thought it was due to raciness or locking concerns, but
I'm not sure about that.

>   - query_module is gone, there is no syscall similar in function but
> with different name

Right.

>   - losing of query_module also prevents binary-only modules
> (guesswork@work)

Nope, they are not prevented.  However, there is a Tainted flag
that is set when one is loaded (and that flag is never cleared).

>   - /proc/modules and /sys/module interface doesn't by far supply what
> query_module could do

Can you state succinctly exactly what you are trying to do?

> My questions are:
> a) Are my observations correct? Where did I go wrong?
> b) Is there any planned replacement of query_module, or extendind sysfs
> or procfs module interface?

Haven't heard of one.

> c) Wouldn't revamping query_module also allow binary-only modules,

they are still possible.

> therefore easier decisions for vendors, whether to support Linux?
>
> Thanks in advance and sorry for these probably quite silly questions.
>
>   - iSteve

-- 
~Randy
-
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/