Am 18.10.11 13:44, schrieb Iain Hibbert: > On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 06:39:49AM -0400, Jared McNeill wrote: >>> I would argue that any manually loaded module shouldn't be autounloaded. >>> What do you think about flagging modules as autoloaded and only >>> autounloading the autoloaded ones?
When I manually load gpiosim, it will autoload gpio. Now when I manually modunload gpiosim, gpio will stay there. But in this case, I want gpio to be autounloaded eventually. >> >> That sounds right to me. >> >> As noted, generally I am not sure what my opinion about autounloading really >> is. But it feels somewhat awkward and error-prone that drivers must "protect" >> themselves against the autounloading kthread. > > How often is autounloading actually effectively used anyway? I mean, if > the module is loaded automatically, it is because the system found that it > was needed. > > So, yes.. there situation where eg USB or PCMCIA devices might have a > transient need for a driver, but on the other hand, the overhead of a > driver being in memory is not that great considering that you used it > once, as the chance of re-use is significant (higher by far than all the > other drivers that have never been needed) > > The real benefit of the modular system is that you don't need to load > hundreds of modules on the off chance that they will be used. A cron entry > could be used to flush unused modules if the sysop cares about that, why > do we need a kthread running? >
