patch for module function probe

[Stone, Joshua I]

Roland McGrath wrote:
>> Yes, it might be.  It would be best if there was a way of
>> automagically supporting module("foo") for a foo that's compiled
>> into vmlinux with a CONFIG_FOO=y instead of CONFIG_FOO=m.  Does
>> kbuild leave any traces of the module ancestry in object files
>> produced this way? 
> 
> I don't think there is any way to recover that information.

Even if there were a way, this justs exacerbate the problem that started
this thread.  If CONFIG_FOO=y and someone also compiles and loads an
unrelated module foo, which would you turn to for resolving
module("foo")?


Josh