Sorry for the delay... On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 05:46:58PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 14:53 +0000, Hart, Darren wrote: > > Adding Scott R. > > I do need to sort out a documentation update. > > > I was just looking into that. It appears the ref-manual.html is the place > > to update. The glossary has a module_autoload definition, which I suppose > > needs to be replaced with KERNEL_MODULE_AUTOLOAD, which will have > > slightly different semantics. > > > > If I understand this correctly, the old model was: > > > > module_autoload_foo = "foo" > > module_autoload_bar = "bar" > > > > Although the following line in the docs confuses me: > > > > module_autoload_<modname> = "modname1 modname2 modname3" > > That is just wrong.
Yeah, I think I confused people here... During one of the discussions I tried to mention that standard /etc/modules-load.d/ can have a single file with multiple module entries in it (and the above line was given as an example). Unfortunately, kernel-module-split class couldn't handle that and required placing one module entry per file. So the old syntax would look like this: module_autoload_<modname1> = "modname1" module_autoload_<modname2> = "modname2" etc. Sorry for the confusion. > > And now, if I interpreted the commit comment correctly, it should look > > like: > > > > KERNEL_MODULE_AUTOLOAD = "foo" > > ... > > KERNEL_MODULE_AUTOLOAD += "bar" > > Correct. > > > I'm not sure how KERNEL_MODULE_PROBECONF is involved, or what value it > > brings beyond module_conf. From what I can tell, the changes now require: > > > > KERNEL_MODULE_PROBECONF = "foo" > > > > module_conf_foo = "options foo baz=1" > > > > (/me notes the order of operations is non-obvious here "if modconf and > > basename in modconflist") > > For module_conf, the value is the build system can know which variables > were set and account for them in the task checksums. If it doesn't have > the list, we'd have to iterate the whole data store and that is a > *painfully* slow operation. > > module_conf isn't commonly used so maintaining a list isn't too much of > a hardship IMO. > > > Do I have this correct? > > Yes. > > CHeers, > > Richard > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
