On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> IIUC it should be safe to extend module_struct with a minor bump to >>>> add 'int flags' to the bottom, but when you check the value you'd need >>>> to check the MMN first. In the module you'd then just have some flags >>>> or'ed together after register_hooks. >>> >>> Something like the attached patch might do it (untested, no MMN minor bump). >>> >>>> >>>> (hopefully someone will check my work) >>> >>> Since modules (module_struct) are déclared globally, unspecified >>> fields at the end of the struct should be initialized to zero, so it >>> should be safe. >> >> I was thinking about modules compiled against the previous definition >> / out of tree. > > Hmm, I'm not sure my commits address this. > > The modules would be run by the latest core without being recompiled > against it, that's the case?
Yes, I think it not yet handled because you're checking the cores MMN # at compile time. I think we need an accessor or macro to retrieve the flags that looks at the module_struct being evaluated which I think also has their compile-time MMN baked in. Probably best to have this be a simple function rather than a macro. -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
