Hi Thomas, On Tue, 2016-11-29 at 19:02 +0100, Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Monday, November 28, 2016 04:01:14 PM Corey Minyard wrote: > > Thanks, this has been on my todo list for a while, but I didn't > > know exactly > > how to accomplish it. > > Why using a SOFTDEP? > If you always want this code in, when ipmi_si or other ipmi HW > drivers are > loaded, why not compile it into this impi_msghandler module?
I prefer the softdep solution. It's a one-line patch, simple and clean, and expresses the intention nicely. I didn't cover other architectures because that's not my area of expertise. > So my idea was and still is to compile the rather small: > ipmi_devintf into ipmi_msghandler > driver. impi_msghandler always gets loaded when ipmi HW drivers gets > successfully loaded. The device interface should always be created as > well. So > why do we need complicated and error prone SOFTDEPS, module > aliases... IMO this is precisely what softdeps were made for. What's the actual user benefit of merging the code of ipmi_msghandler and ipmi_devintf? In fact, IMO it's a bonus that this is a *soft* dep, as it provides users the freedom *not* to have /dev/ipmi0 in the system (for security reasons perhaps), by blacklisting or removing ipmi_devintf.ko. Best Regards, Martin -- Dr. Martin Wilck <[email protected]>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107 SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
