Re: Kernel module framework status?

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On May 5, 10:17am, maya%netbsd.org@localhost wrote:
}
} If someone wants to do this route of metadata, please consider the
} addition of a metadata property "should this be auto loaded".
} 
} Currently we have ad-hoc logic for some modules that might be auto
} loaded (compat_...) and it'd probably be cleaner to do this.

     This appears to be a complete misunderstanding.  There isn't
some magic way that modules get autoloaded.  There has to be
something that triggers the loading.  In the case of compat modules,
when the kernel tries to execute a binary and finds that it doesn't
recognise it, it then tries varies modules to see if they recogonise
it.  A similar thing would happen with file systems.  if you try to
mount some media and the kernel doesn't recogonise the file system,
it will try to load various file system modules to see they recogonise
it.  All modules are inherently autoloadable.  There just has to
be some kind of mechanism to trigger the load.  The only thing that
additional metadata would provide is classification, such as file
system, syscall, driver, exec, etc.  However, we already have a
mechanism that can be used for this purpose.  Note that it is
possible to set a module not to be autoloadable, see module_autoload()
in module(9).

}-- End of excerpt from maya%netbsd.org@localhost