Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 02:50:03 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> To: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> Cc: abial@webgiro.com (Andrzej Bialecki), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Modules and sysctl tree Message-ID: <81199.944909403@zippy.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 09 Dec 1999 15:59:35 PST." <199912092359.PAA76217@bubba.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I think the latter. In 'theory' there should be no discernable > difference between functionality from a KLD vs. the same functionality > compiled directly into the kernel. Only in theory, of course. :) As Andrzej has already pointed out, modules can also be loaded and unloaded, creating a sysctl space where things enter and leave dynamically. Let's say I'm somebody who creates a nifty little GUI sysctl editor for the CLI-challenged and, because it's time-consuming to build a form with fields for all the relevant sysctl variables, I take the obvious shortcut of parsing the output of `sysctl -A' once at startup time and then dealing with the individual field callbacks thereafter. On my "classic" system with a config-generated kernel, this works just fine and my GUI front-end for sysctl is eventually declared "useful enough" that I start handing it around. Then somebody who actually loads and unloads klds tries to use it, and results (needless to say) are no longer quite in alignment with expectations. :) Just a hypothetical scenario, of course, but I simply wanted to make the point that "no discernable difference" might be hard to achieve for certain values of discernment. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?81199.944909403>