* Re: Fw: [PATCH] Re: module_param() doesn't seem to work in 2.6.6-rc1
[not found] <20040417011836.318c679b.akpm@osdl.org>
@ 2004-04-17 23:21 ` Rusty Russell
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Rusty Russell @ 2004-04-17 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: Pavel Roskin, lkml - Kernel Mailing List
On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 18:18, Andrew Morton wrote:
> OK?
Yes, but I prefer this version, which actually checks whether the
section exists, rather than checking the size (same effect, but this is
clearer).
Name: Warn if module_param and MODULE_PARM mixed
Status: Trivial
From: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
If you use both module_param (new) and MODULE_PARM (obsolete) in a
module, only the second gets recognised. Warn.
diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal .14500-linux-2.6.6-rc1-bk1/kernel/module.c .14500-linux-2.6.6-rc1-bk1.updated/kernel/module.c
--- .14500-linux-2.6.6-rc1-bk1/kernel/module.c 2004-04-15 16:06:55.000000000 +1000
+++ .14500-linux-2.6.6-rc1-bk1.updated/kernel/module.c 2004-04-18 09:17:26.000000000 +1000
@@ -1541,6 +1541,10 @@ static struct module *load_module(void _
/ sizeof(struct obsolete_modparm),
sechdrs, symindex,
(char *)sechdrs[strindex].sh_addr);
+ if (setupindex)
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: Ignoring new-style "
+ "parameters in presence of obsolete ones\n",
+ mod->name);
} else {
/* Size of section 0 is 0, so this works well if no params */
err = parse_args(mod->name, mod->args,
--
Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread