On Mon, 2026-09-14 at 00:33 +0800, Wen Yang wrote: > Thanks for the review, Gabriele, I agree with your points and will > follow them. > > Just to clarify the background : the struct module * field and the > try_module_get()/module_put() logic were added to address the point > raised by sashiko. After this change sashiko no longer complains about it.
Yeah I imagined it, sashiko has a point, whatever is EXPORTed can be used by modules, so it may imply modules are supported. What sashiko ignores is maintainability requirements. A human is reviewing anyone trying to use reactors as modules, and adding that change without properly advertising it may do more harm than good. > The module-based reactor support, together with its kselftest, will be > send as a separate series in a few days. Sounds good, so I can review and test it as it deserves. > As a side note, we are looking into using the rv framework for > functional safety in autonomous driving. Depending on how internal > validation progress, there will likely be further changes to the rv > subsystem in the near future. I'll be glad to discuss them as they come. Nice, thanks for sharing, I had a few conversations about RV in functional safety domains over the past weeks, I now better understand the challenges. It'd be very interesting to discuss your requirements too. Thanks, Gabriele
