devfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: changing shared objects

To: Russell Coker <russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: changing shared objects
From: Richard Gooch <rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:51:59 -0600
Cc: devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20020510113548.1007F3283@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20020510113548.1007F3283@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Russell Coker writes:
> I think that there should be a way to tell devfsd to unload shared
> objects from CFUNCTION/MFUNCTION entries and reload them.  This
> would allow me to replace the shared object with a new version
> without requiring that devfsd be restarted.
> 
> I know that the devfsd would need to be restarted if I was trying to
> fix a serious bug in the module (IE memory corruption), but for
> minor issues (changing logging messages or adding new functions) it
> should not be necessary to stop and restart devfsd entirely IMHO.

So you're not even happy with sending SIGHUP to devfsd? What's the
harm in doing that?

While I could define another signal to reload shared objects, there
are a number of things I don't like about that:
- code bloat
- consumes yet another signal
- requires struct shared_object to record the path to the library
- code bloat.

And besides that, it would require more code. Oh, and did I mention
code bloat? Unless you can show me why this feature is so much better
than just sending SIGHUP, I'm reluctant to add code to do this.

                                Regards,

                                        Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current:   rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>