On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Jessica Yu <j...@kernel.org> wrote: > +++ Djalal Harouni [04/12/17 10:01 +0100]: >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@kernel.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Jessica Yu wrote: >>>> >>>> Just some quick questions - are there any plans to use these in-kernel >>>> module aliases anywhere else? Or are you using them just for debugging? >>> >>> >>> As-is for now just debugging, but this could also more easily enable >>> folks to >>> prototype further evaluation of its uses. IMHO just having this at least >>> posted >>> online should suffice the later aspect of enabling folks to prototype. >> >> >> I confirm that, after the module auto-load discussion where it is >> clear that we need to improve the infrastructure, this debug >> information may save some time, maybe someone can automate a script go >> through modules and then on filesystem, > > >> however these patches may show >> which module lead to load another one, right ? on userspace if there >> are multiple dependencies it can be difficult I think. > > > Hm? I'm confused by what you mean here. The patchset just saves and > prints a module's aliases on module load if the debug option is > enabled. There's no dependency tracking here; that's modprobe's job. > And if you need to see which additional modules are being loaded as a > result of a module load there's already modprobe --verbose and > modules.dep..
Yes I was referring by the printing or kernel logs order, if two modules depend on same one, we know which first one triggered it, and in that context it will be a bit easier in the auto-loading context, maybe like crypto ones that can be triggered from anywhere. Thanks! -- tixxdz
