From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755916AbYDFDI6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Apr 2008 23:08:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751764AbYDFDIv (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Apr 2008 23:08:51 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:38828 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751598AbYDFDIu (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Apr 2008 23:08:50 -0400 From: Rusty Russell To: Tom Horsley Subject: Re: module parameters versus kernel command line Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 13:08:30 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Marc Pignat , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jon Masters References: <20080403090053.56f243df@tomh> <200804050829.00418.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20080405185444.2c433673@tomh> In-Reply-To: <20080405185444.2c433673@tomh> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804061308.30921.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 06 April 2008 08:54:44 Tom Horsley wrote: > On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 08:29:00 +1000 > > Rusty Russell wrote: > > I like this idea, and also have module tools ship with > > a 'check-kernel-cmdline' tool which handles the warnings for unusable > > cmdline params. Distributions can run this in their init scripts, and we > > can remove the warning from the kernel. > > Or maybe not have the warning at all, after all, even if > sillymodule.sillyarg=1 doesn't make sense when I booted, who's to say I > can't download the source to sillymodule, compile it, and modprobe it after > boot time :-). I think it's worse not to have typo protection. Of course, our logs are so noisy they might miss the warning anyway. Rusty.