On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:43:54PM +0100, Petr Pavlu wrote: > On 3/11/23 06:17, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > Modules can have a series of aliases, but we don't currently use > > them to check if a module is already loaded. Part of this is because > > load_module() will stick to checking for already loaded modules using > > the actual module name, not an alias. Its however desriable to also > > check for aliases on find_module_all() for existing callers and future > > callers. The curent gain to using aliases on find_module_all() will > > simply be to be able to support unloading modules using the alias using > > the delete_module() syscall. > > Different modules can have same aliases. Running > 'sort modules.alias | cut -d' ' -f2 | uniq -dc' shows a list of them. Ah then nevermind then thanks! I'll be sure to document this moving forwward! > When a modprobe load of such an alias is requested, my reading is that this > new find_module_all() logic (if enabled) causes that only the first matched > module is inserted and others get recognized as duplicates, which doesn't look > right to me. > > In general, I'm not sure that I understand motivation to keep track of these > aliases in the kernel. Do you have links to previous discussions that I could > perhaps read? The idea was an old one and if it could help, but the above makes the idea useless, and so the only value for these aliases in-kernel could be for debugging, that's all. Removing this will also simplify this patch series anyway. Luis
