On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 05/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> >> On 05/10, Lucas De Marchi wrote: >> > >> > but I think it's a good tradeoff and covers other use cases as you >> > pointed out as well. >> >> OK, good. > > Yes, perhaps this makes sense anyway but... > >> > Ok. I'll give it a try. >> >> Please wait a bit, I'll send v2. See below. > > Cough, wait ;) > > Why do we need theese changes ???? > >> > > -char modprobe_path[KMOD_PATH_LEN] = "/sbin/modprobe"; >> > > +char modprobe_path[KMOD_PATH_LEN] = "/sbin/modprobe -q --"; >> >> No. This is incompatible change, we shouldn't do this. > > Exactly. This can break a distro which writes to sys/kernel/modprobe. > > And if we do not do this, you can simply make a single trivial patch > which does > > - char modprobe_path[KMOD_PATH_LEN] = "/sbin/modprobe"; > + char modprobe_path[KMOD_PATH_LEN] = > CONFIG_DEFAULT_MODULE_LOAD_BIN; > > that it all. (or perhaps a kernel parameter makes more sense). > > Yes, this doesn't allow to pass the additional arguments, but is it > that important?
Yes, because I don't want to simply change the binary to use, I want to be able to use a general "kmod" binary that accept a command like "load". Next version of kmod will accept things like this (see the commit message in patch 3/3): kmod load modulename oh... and busybox users might be interested in this as well since they can do "busybox modprobe modulename" directly, too Lucas De Marchi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/