From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for August 14 (sysfs/acpi errors) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 05:48:26 +0200 Message-ID: <48A64E0A.8090408@linux.intel.com> References: <20080814172945.250a27f2.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080814083828.d10e126d.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <3ae72650808150427q364842ccicf0a0978b30ca98c@mail.gmail.com> <20080815085836.67e420f1.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <1218854219.3629.30.camel@lgn.site> <48A64235.2030108@linux.intel.com> <1218856798.3629.45.camel@lgn.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mga07.intel.com ([143.182.124.22]:56213 "EHLO azsmga101.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752590AbYHPDsY (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:48:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1218856798.3629.45.camel@lgn.site> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Kay Sievers Cc: Randy Dunlap , Stephen Rothwell , gregkh , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au >=20 > They have been module options, not prefixed kernel parameters so far, > and the prefix was just the module name. > So it just strikes back, that acpi uses generic names for the modules= , > there would have been no problem if "power" would be called "acpi_pow= er" > and the options would just be =EF=BB=BF"acpi.acpica_version" and > "acpi_power.nocheck". >=20 > But well, there are driver modules just called "option", so acpi is n= ot > that bad. :) >=20 >> I think the generic params code should be fixed to handle this. >=20 > We could try to look up existing directories to use instead of expect= ing > that we need to create and own them. I guess, sysfs does this anyways, doesn't it. We would just need to teach it to not BUG() in this case, perhaps with a special entry point. Also a BUG() in general seems a little harsh for this, surely a WARN_ON should be enough. -Andi