On Sunday, December 21, 2014 at 01:03:36 PM, Hoyer, Marko wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Umut Tezduyar Lindskog [mailto:u...@tezduyar.com] > > Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 6:45 PM > > To: Hoyer, Marko (ADITG/SW2) > > Cc: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] Improving module loading > > > > [...] > > > I had such a discussion earlier with some of the systemd guys. My > > intention was to introduce an additional unit for module loading for > > exactly the reason you mentioned. The following (reasonable) outcome > > was: > > > > Do you have links for the discussions, I cannot find them. > > Actually not, sorry. The discussion was not done via any mailing list. > > > systemd already has a service that loads the modules. > > Sorry, there is a word missing in my sentence above. My idea was not to > introduce a "unit" for modules loading but an own "unit type", such as > .kmodule. The idea was to define .kmodule units to load one or a set of > kernel modules each at a certain point during startup by just integrating > them into the startup dependency tree. This idea would require integrating > kind of worker threads into systemd. The outcome was as summarized below.
Why would you need a separate unit type for that? load-module@.service: [Unit] Description=Load kernel module %I DefaultDependencies=no [Service] Type=oneshot RemainAfterExit=yes ExecStart=/usr/bin/modprobe %I ...then add a dependency like Required=load-module@foo.service and After=load-module@foo.service. -- Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx /
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
