Make MOD_QUIESCE a bit more useful..
jhb at freebsd.org
Mon Aug 11 15:44:56 UTC 2008
On Sunday 10 August 2008 06:53:33 pm M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <200808091637.33820.jhb at freebsd.org>
> John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> writes:
> : So currently the MOD_QUIESCE event is posted to a module when unloading a
> : so it can veto non-forced unloads. However, the current implementation in
> : the kernel linker is to run through all the modules in a file, posting
> : MOD_QUIESCE followed by MOD_UNLOAD on each module serially. Thus, if you
> : have multiple modules in a single kld and one of the modules veto's an
> : request via MOD_QUIESCE, you don't know as the module author if any of
> : modules were unloaded via MOD_UNLOAD or not. I think a better approach
> : be to change the kernel linker to invoke MOD_QUIESCE on all modules in a
> : single pass first. If none of those fail (or it's a forced unload), then
> : can do a second pass invoking MOD_UNLOAD on all the modules.
> That sounds great to me. I'm a bit surprised it is implemented the
> way you say...
So was I. What happens now is that the kernel linker does a for loop over all
the modules calling 'module_unload()'. module_unload() invokes both
MOD_QUIESCE and MOD_UNLOAD back to back.
Hmm, so fixing this brings up one extra note: Do we need a new module event
(say MOD_UNLOAD_ABORTED, MOD_AWAKEN, or MOD_DEQUIESCE) that would get invoked
when a kldunload is veto'd by a MOD_QUIESCE event that would get posted to
all the modules that had successfully QUIESCED so far?
More information about the freebsd-arch