Re: [PATCH] mii module broken under new scheme

[David Woodhouse]

[e-mail] said:
>  Rusty told me that it is intentional. Add
> no_module_init;
> at the end of module. He even sent patch which fixes dozen of such
> modules (15 I had on my system...) to Linus, but it get somehow lost.

> Only question is whether we want to have it this way or no.

Some questions you might want to consider before that one:

1. How do we handle "insmod -odummy0 dummy.o ; insmod -odummy1 dummy.o"

2. When does the module name differ from the filename (modulo .o) ?

3. Given your answers to #1 and #2, is the module name redundant anyway?

--
dwmw2