On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:47:04 EST, Mathieu Desnoyers said: > I am throwing this one-liner in and let's see how people react. It only makes > sure that a module that has been "forced" to be loaded won't have its markers > used. It is important to leave this check to make sure the kernel does not > crash > by expecting the markers part of the struct module by mistake in the case > there > is an incorrect checksum.
I can live with that - if anything, a force-loaded GPL module deserves to lose even more than a non-GPL module built against the current kernel. Quite frankly, given that one of the reasons given for not liking closed modules is "it's not maintainable", you'd *expect* that the infrastructure for allowing a force-load of a module would have been thrown out entirely - is there anything more unmaintainable than a module you *know* was built against different headers and thus is using the wrong offsets for things?
pgpszv6pkXgb2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
