Re: [MiNT] patch:MiNT:KM_FREE

[Paul Wratt <paul.wratt@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Helmut Karlowski <hk10@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 13.12.2009, 23:39 Uhr, schrieb Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk>:
>
>> What happens if you just rename a module a try to load it ?
>
> Then the renamed one is loaded.
>
>> I'd like something a little more robust than just using a filename.
>
> I've mentioned this in my first posting - but this is how it's implemented.
>
> -Helmut
>
is this one part of the KM that need to be reworked. I would say a
file pointer should be enough, but only if its "siganure" says its not
already loaded. Can the filename be used in combo with app_id, or is
that strictly AES only..

What circumstance should it be possible to load two modules that are
the same. Certain other kernels do allow this if the KM handles
multiple "things".

I thing there may be a need for a functioning KM skeleton (or similar)
to allow co-exist, order and unload testing, including km reloading

would a modprobe type tool for MiNT be of any use?

Paul