"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Rusty, > > Thanks for the review! One open question below. > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> [CC widened, so that some more review might come in. Rusty?] >> >> Sure. >> >> Looks good. but: >> >>> .B EBUSY >>> The module's initialization routine failed. >> >> Possibly. You should mention that the individual module's >> initialization routine can return other errors as appropriate. > > Done! > > In fact, the existing EBUSY text seems completely bogus. Should it not > read something like > "Timeout while trying to resolve a symbol reference by this module."? Yes, indeed. >>> .BR EINVAL " (Linux 2.4 and earlier)" >>> Some >>> .I image >>> slot is filled in incorrectly, >>> .I image\->name >>> does not correspond to the original module name, some >>> .I image\->deps >>> entry does not correspond to a loaded module, >>> or some other similar inconsistency. >>> .TP >> >> Why document this? > > Because the general approach in man-pages is to document past as well > as current behavior. Since there are few user-space customers of > init_module(), perhaps you are right that this is unnecessary. I > dropped it. It was just that you didn't refer to the old structure anywhere else... Thanks, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
