Re: [PATCH 0/1] rust: module_param: support bool parameters

[Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org>]

Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> writes:

> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 02:00:17PM +0200, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
>> "Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Sat, Apr 11, 2026 at 09:02:53AM -0400, Wenzhao Liao wrote:
>> >> Sorry for the earlier noise and for our unfamiliarity with parts of the
>> >> kernel submission process, which created extra burden for maintainers.
>> >>
>> >> This patch adds boolean module parameter support to the Rust `module!`
>> >> parameter path.
>> >>
>> >> It implements `ModuleParam` for `bool` and wires `PARAM_OPS_BOOL` into
>> >> the Rust module parameter machinery, so Rust-side parsing reuses the
>> >> existing kernel `kstrtobool()` semantics through `kstrtobool_bytes()`
>> >> instead of introducing a separate parser. A boolean parameter is also
>> >> added to `samples/rust/rust_minimal.rs` as a small reference user and
>> >> build-time validation point.
>> >
>> > What driver needs this feature?  Module options should be very rare
>> > going forward as they are 1990's technology and do not fit the "modern"
>> > kernel model at all.
>> 
>> Rust null block uses module parameters, and was requested to use proper
>> boolean parsing rather than overloading u8 parsing for boolean
>> parameters [1].
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Andreas Hindborg
>> 
>> 
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/abfK4eji5jKSeO_W@google.com/
>> 
>
> Ok, then that needs to be said somewhere, and ideally, have the code
> that uses that as part of the patch series.

It should be mentioned for sure, with a link to the code. I'm not sure
including this patch in the rnull driver series is the right approach.
That series is a really long already. I think using the b4 dependency
feature for dependencies is a better approach for marking dependencies.

I understand that you want to see APIs in context of use, that makes
sense.


Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg