| To: | Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Compile-time versus run-time |
| From: | Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 27 Mar 2001 23:16:19 +1000 |
| Cc: | "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <3ABF2F8E.B212A96B@uow.edu.au> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Andrew Morton wrote: > CONFIG_8139TOO_TUNE_TWISTER > (And wouldn't it be nice to be able to get the same functionality > which module options give us when using a statically linked driver?) On my todo list for 2.5. MODULE_PARM will be promoted to module_name.parm when the object is built in. insmod foo debug=1 or boot with foo.debug=1. It needs a mapping of source to module which is not easy to get for multi object modules in 2.4, my 2.5 makefile rewrite will make it easy. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Compile-time versus run-time, Mark Peugeot |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Kernel Network Implementation help., EOIN RYAN |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Compile-time versus run-time, Mark Peugeot |
| Next by Thread: | FW: destructor use in skb, Raj, Ashok |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |