In message <2004...@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org>, Brian Somers writes:
I would have thought a MOD_UNQUIESCE would be required too - maybe called
MOD_ACTIVATE (but I don't care much about the name). It'd make things
When a module is loaded, it would be in a quiescent state allowing only a
MOD_UNLOAD or a MOD_ACTIVATE. It's open for business between MOD_ACTIVATE
I'm not sure I see any real-world application for this ? Can you give an
example ? Why would you load a module and not use it ?
The idea is that the user can be more active in getting rid of the active
module by QUIESCEing it, then running around murdering processes before
I could maybe see a point in this but I cannot remember one single instance
where I would have actually done this myself.
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
ph...@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.