Bug#1006708: hw-detect: Fails to reload iwlwifi module (modprobe: FATAL: Module iwlwifi is in use)
Am 15.12.23 um 20:43 schrieb Cyril Brulebois:
With these small modifications I can currently use the d-i on my X1 G11
without further issues. A small exception, as the firmware-iwlwifi/testing
can't provide the required firmware files right now they need to get
provided on an additional inserted media.
Great, thanks. Do you actual need to modprobe $module at that point? I
thought the block right after that should modprobe -r/modprobe iwlwifi
on its own? (But it wasn't sufficient before you starting unloading
iwlmvm.)
The code block above is already still trying to do this removal and
loading of iwlwifi, but is of course not working due module deps. So
this not working call are still visible in the logs. I'd say it's not
nice at the moment but in the end nothing more.
-----%<----- line 408++
# remove and reload modules so they see the new firmware
for module in $modules; do
if ! nic_is_configured $module; then
log "removing and loading kernel module $module"
log_output modprobe -r $module || true
log_output modprobe $module || true
----->%----
That's something I was not able to catch nicely for the iwlwifi
module/driver, but my understanding of the code and the functions calls
isn't good enough right now. For more diving in I'd need to build up a
better testing environment. I'm not able to do this at the moment.
I guess over time we will see more of such corner cases with a required
dedicated module reload behavior. Means we need to add more code that is
able to handle this. I haven't a good approach how a generic code for
this could look like.
...
If you are fine I can raise a MR for easy pulling in. Otherwise feel free to
comment on my changes.
I know mixed stuff isn't too nice, and unifying might be appealing, but
that makes cherry-picking stuff harder, so I tend to only unify things
when I'm actually changing code… Others might feel differently.
This is quite always depending on the POV :-) , but I'm emotionless on
this, the maintainers decide how to deal with such things as it's their
time and responsibility in the end.
So I'll drop this patch.
Well spotted, for the typo.
Naaa, the spelling correction was highlighting the misspelled word. :-)
---
Regards
Carsten
Reply to: