lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] lib: add module unload support to sort tests
From
Date
On 12/19/17 14:51, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 23:10:00 +0530 Pravin Shedge <pravin.shedge4linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> If so, why do you think we shiould alter lib/test_sort.c to behave in
>>> this atypical fashion?
>>
>> If test case is going affects only at boot time or at module load
>> time, it's smart decision to unload module
>> automatically on successful completion.
>
> OK.
>
> I think it does make sense for a lib/text_*.ko type module to unload
> itself after successful completion of the test. However:
>
> - returning a fake error code from the module's module_init() is a
> daft way of doing that. We should find a way to let the
> module_init() handler tell do_init_module() "I succeeded, but please
> unload me anyway". So the initial sys_init_module() call doesn't say
> "it failed". Could create a new, kernel-internal errno for this and
> have do_init_module() rewrite that to 0.
>
> Maybe. A sys_init_module() caller's expectation is that if the
> syscall succeeded then the module is now loaded.
>
> Well. Except for the test_*.ko modules, which are special.
>
> - Changing any test module so that it now auto-unloads on success is
> a non-back-compat change. The practical effect of which will be very
> minor: a subsequent rmmod finds that the module isn't there.
>
> I'm not sure what to do, really. Does any of this matter much at all?

Nope. But I would merge this patch that returns fake-error so that
the module doesn't remain loaded, similar to what some others also do.

I don't think it's worth a new return value for success_but_unload_me.


--
~Randy

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-20 00:07    [W:0.215 / U:0.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site