Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 11:56:08 +0100 From: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: Alex Zepeda <jazepeda@pacbell.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stale modules (Re: panic in the morning) Message-ID: <38FEE248.62AF3FE6@originative.co.uk> References: <000365a645d89ae9_mailit@mail.pacbell.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004191814410.73491-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> <200004200731.BAA07337@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Warner Losh wrote: > > In message <000365a645d89ae9_mailit@mail.pacbell.net> Alex Zepeda writes: > : Perhaps it's time to implement some sort of versioning in the modules to > : prevent them from being loaded into the incorrect kernel. > > In theory that sounds nice, but in -current the kernel ABI changes too > quickly for that to be effecitve. The general rule in -current is > that the modules must be compiled at the same time as the kernel, or > from the same sources. Anything else might work, but is unsupported. > I don't know of a good way to serialize (eg assign a serial number to) > the sources that would work. Why not just use a UTC timestamp? If your kernel is newer than the module then don't load the module. Maybe make it a sysctl as well so that rapid developer folks can disable it. Even if it was used just as a warning it would remind people to think about the modules. I've lost count of the number of times that I've chased a kernel bug before remembering to rebuild modules. I know a timestamp doesn't guarantess ABI compatibility but it solves the most common problem, which is rebuilding a kernel but forgetting to rebuild the modules. Paul. 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?38FEE248.62AF3FE6>