[systemd-devel] Improving module loading

[Ivan Shapovalov]

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 at 01:03:36 PM, Hoyer, Marko wrote:	
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Umut Tezduyar Lindskog [mailto:umut at tezduyar.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 6:45 PM
> > To: Hoyer, Marko (ADITG/SW2)
> > Cc: systemd-devel at 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 at .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 at foo.service and After=load-module at foo.service.

-- 
Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx /
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20141221/90db75b6/attachment.sig>