[arch-dev-public] Module blacklisting
dpmcgee at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 13:05:47 EST 2008
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Daniel Isenmann
> > > <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
> > > > I'm a little bit confused right now. How can I blacklist modules. I
> > > > have test both, MOD_BLACKLIST=(...) and MODULES=(!...), but both don't
> > > > work. udev loads every module which can be loaded. For example I
> > > > blacklist nvidiafb, but udev loads it. Packages are up2date with
> > > > testing repo.
> > > >
> > > > Can someone please explain it or the status is on this topic?
> > >
> > > The status is that I haven't gotten a concise answer. On this. For the
> > > time being, I think we should do the following:
> > >
> > > a) Rebuild udev 118 with start_udev in there, for the people who keep
> > > their systems in some goofy limbo state by only updating singular
> > > packages at a time
> > And add a big old echo at the top saying "You are using start_dev.
> > This script will be removed in a future release!"
> Doesn't work. It's run with 2>&1 >/dev/null, which is very good at
> keeping users uninformed of what's going on.
Well that is dumb. Shoot.
> > > c) Remove framebuffer module loading from the load-modules script (it
> > > should never have been there in the first place).
> > Agreed. What are the hotpoints in this script as well? Something like
> > this seems inefficient:
> > i="$(/sbin/modprobe -i --show-depends $1 | sed "s#^insmod
> > /lib.*/\(.*\)\.ko.*#\1#g" | sed 's|-|_|g')"
> > We invoke 3 subprocesses here (modprobe, sed, and sed). Surely the two
> > seds can be combined.
> already done locally.
> > See a trend here? So we have the following in one run of
> > load-modules.sh (if we look back at the version packaged with 116):
> Good catch with all the seds... but ummm.... how about we NOT worry
> about optimizing a script we'd like to get rid of? I'm sure start_udev
> could use some cleanup, want to do that too?
start_udev isn't even used by the curent initscripts though, so thats
a different point than this one.
Yes, I feel like maybe a short and sweet C program would be better,
but for now cleaning some things up makes sense and will probably have
an effect on the loading events time, thats all. If I can spend a half
hour making it a little better and/or more efficient, I think that is
time well spent, even if it is going to eventually be scrapped.
More information about the arch-dev-public