On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 07:49:00 -0500, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com> wrote: >Keith Owens wrote: >> I prefer a requirement that all net drivers upgrade to the new >> interface, otherwise we have odd drivers using the old interface >> forever and being at risk of module unload. That is why I coded my >> patch as returning -ENODEV if there was no dev->open. However I have >> to accept that just before a 2.4 release is not the best time to have a >> flag day. Put it down for 2.5. > >What is "it" that gets put off until 2.5? Breaking net drivers with an >interface upgrade, or eliminating this race? Forcing all network drivers to define a dev->open routine. >There is absolutely no need to break drivers for this. Not only is it >needless pain, but doing so is inconsistent -- with struct >file_operations, I am free to have owner==NULL. True, but if you set owner==NULL for something that is really in a module then you are lying to the module layer. See foot, shoot foot. - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
