Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2019 19:09:19 -0800 From: Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> To: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Killing RANDOM_LOADABLE? Message-ID: <CAG6CVpVf2Ufu-J_GZBCAZdgKpABMJvjzv5qrHVJn7ct40GXV9g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <95398.1575254530@kaos.jnpr.net> References: <CAG6CVpXFjxUxKL6Bb3Gw1Krdo4PkUPBjCnnG5hrDcr39aoF=zQ@mail.gmail.com> <40710.1575238505@kaos.jnpr.net> <CAG6CVpXyo_BKhYVDzV_=D90kTkpFtpYOmpFa0S6XuXtn%2B5wpFw@mail.gmail.com> <95398.1575254530@kaos.jnpr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 6:42 PM Simon J. Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net> wrote: > Per my followup, we are no longer using RANDOM_LOADABLE, > we preload the selected module. So long as that functionality is not > broken we should be ok. If your preload system does not use RANDOM_LOADABLE, then perhaps there aren't any consumers. That'd be great. I don't intend to change loader(8) preloading or the kernel linker in relation to this topic. > Since we haven't used it for a couple of years I'd hope we would not be > impacted but I know we've been bitten in the past by changes in the random > infra, though I don't recall the detail - will check with some other > folk. Thanks for checking, I appreciate it. Best, Conrad
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAG6CVpVf2Ufu-J_GZBCAZdgKpABMJvjzv5qrHVJn7ct40GXV9g>