From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Dec 13 06:46:24 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ABE316A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 13 Dec 2003 06:46:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alpha.siliconlandmark.com (alpha.siliconlandmark.com
	[209.69.98.4])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD1243D35
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 13 Dec 2003 06:46:22 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
Received: from alpha.siliconlandmark.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	hBDEkLZV079407;	Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:46:21 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
Received: from localhost (andy@localhost)hBDEkLEB079404;
	Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:46:21 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: alpha.siliconlandmark.com: andy owned process doing
	-bs
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:46:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com>
To: toxa <postfix@sendmail.ru>
In-Reply-To: <200312121910.14245.postfix@sendmail.ru>
Message-ID: <20031213091736.C44419@alpha.siliconlandmark.com>
References: <200312121910.14245.postfix@sendmail.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: CURRENT state of modules
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:46:24 -0000


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, toxa wrote:

> Looking back through mailing list I found only one big thread about advantages
> and disadvantages of kernel modules and still have questions about it.
>
> Now with upgrading from 5.1-current to 5.2-current because of trying if usb
> subsystem still broken or not on my laptop, I decide to build a big part of
> kernel as modules. I remove many devices from kernel putting'em into
> loader.conf:
...snip...
> There are all usb devices, wireless lan devices, pcmcia devices, video devices
> (agp, radeon) and nfs features.
>
> So my question is loading MANY modules will be as stable (or as unstable) as
> putting them into kernel as appropriate devices (or options), or I will found
> some problems?

I've run my desktop system with a number of modules (8 in total) for a
while without any problems.

Kernel modules introduce a number of possible failure paths and an avenue
for malicious code to be loaded. As such, some might determine that the
flexibility isn't worth it for their production online systems. If uptime
and stability is that big a concern, you probably shouldn't be running
CURRENT in the first place. ;)

Regards,

> Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant >
> Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/    >