Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:44:33 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea... Message-ID: <77806.1090392273@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:37:39 PDT." <20040720203739.GA72252@VARK.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20040720203739.GA72252@VARK.homeunix.com>, David Schultz writes: >> Looking for sleep addresses inside the module might make sense too. > >But this is just a heuristic that may sometimes fail. The module >might be holding resources or locks, it could have callbacks, etc. >If we're going to offer a forcible unload option, [...] This has _nothing_ to do with forcible unload. Please read the subject, again if necessary. This is an idea for a debug tool which may help people properly debug and implement unload *in general*. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?77806.1090392273>