Subject: Re: LKM - why don't we use them ?
To: Chris G. Demetriou <>
From: Gary D. Duzan <>
List: current-users
Date: 02/22/1994 08:48:36
In Message <199402220919.BAA03643@erewhon.CS.Berkeley.EDU> ,
   "Chris G. Demetriou" <> wrote:

=>It boils down to this, at least in my opinion:
=>If something's going to be used all of the time, then it should be in
=>the 'real' kernel, because that:
=>	(1) decreases start up time (no modules to load)
=>	(2) increases security (fewer points of attack)
=>	(3) increases reliability (fewer points that can fail)
=>however, for 'random,' not oft-used subsystems, i'd say that LKMs
=>are 'the thing to use.'
   Three questions: 1) Are LKMs a decent way to implement new protocol
stacks, at least for development? 2) Are LKMs fairly portable? and
3) Where can I get information on how to develop new modules? Thanx.

                                      Gary D. Duzan
                         Humble Practitioner of the Computer Arts