Re: [PATCH] bridge: Module use count must be updated as bridges are created/destroyed

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

>>> On 29.04.11 at 10:44, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:31:27 +0100
>>>>> On 29.04.11 at 10:10, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:41:10 +0100
>>>> You talk of rmmod on the very module, but the issue is about
>>>> modprobe -r on a dependent module. I cannot believe you consider
>>>> it correct that *implicit* unloading of bridge.ko should happen when
>>>> bridges are configured.
>>> Which module in particular depends upon bridge and causes the
>>> problem?
>> The problem was observed (a long time ago) with ebtable_broute,
>> and I cannot see how this would have changed meanwhile.
> Well your change makes it so that someone who actually _wants_ to
> unload the bridge module, regardless of configuration, cannot do so.
> I think that's a worse problem than this ebtables thing.
> Nothing on the system should be hitting modules with unload requests
> unless the user explicitly asked for that specific module to be
> unloaded.  At least not by default.
> So the me the problem is perhaps that "modprobe -r" does this auto
> dependency unloading thing by default.
> When we first fixed network device drivers so that they now properly
> always run with no module refcount at all, people complained because
> there were some distributions that ran some daemon that periodically
> looked for "unreferenced" modules and "helped" the user by
> automatically unloaded them.
> We killed that foolish daemon, and we can fix "modprobe -r" too.

Michal - aren't you the modutils maintainer? What are your thoughts
here? (The original report we got is

> Does "rmmod" have this behavior too?  If not, and it does the right
> thing by only unloaded what the user asked for, then people should
> use that.

No, it doesn't. Other than modprobe, rmmod deals only with the
module specified.

> I really don't in any way want to block people from being able to
> cleanly unload the bridge module, regardless of configuration, if
> that's what they want so your patch as written is not going to be
> considered for inclusion.

I understood that meanwhile, yet fail to see an alternative solution
(imo this auto-unloading is quite desirable in other cases).


Bridge mailing list

[Netdev]     [AoE Tools]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux Resources]

Add to Google Powered by Linux