From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
To: Stelian Pop <stelian@popies.net>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/net/pcmcia: use module_param() instead of MODULE_PARM()
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:47:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41927055.9030306@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041110195200.GJ2706@deep-space-9.dsnet>
Stelian Pop wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 08:35:05AM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Stelian,
>
>
> Hi.
>
>>Several of these changes expose module parameters to sysfs
>>(i.e., have permissions of non-zero value) without need for that IMO.
>>
>>This came up yesterday on the kernel-janitors mailing list.
>>When asked about it, Greg KH replied:
>
>
> :)
>
> I shouldn't probably discuss Greg's advice, but...
AFAIK, you are free to disagree as long as I or we can also
disagree. :)
>>>Can someone please clarify the "official guidelines" for
>>>module parameter permissions in sysfs?
>>
>>"When it makes sense to have it exposed to userspace"
>>
>>Yeah, it's vague, sorry, but it all depends.
>>
>>For things that can be changed on the fly, expose it.
>
>
> ... with a write permission. Agreed.
>
>
>>For things that don't really matter, and no one will ever look them up,
>>don't.
>>I think the irq stuff is in the "don't" category, as almost no
>>one messes with them anymore.
>
>
> In this case why is this a module parameter at all ? If it doesn't
> matter at all then it should get removed from all places.
>
> In fact, I do think that all module parameter should be exposed in
> /sys, and that a '0' in module_param() should really mean 0400.
>
> It can be useful to know what parameters have been passed to a module,
> and I cannot think of a single case where we want to hide this
> information (and no, security doesn't really apply here. If you have
> root rights than you can also look into the kernel memory and find
> out the value by yourself).
>
> The only questions one should ask himself about a module parameter is
> whether:
> - it is a R/O or a R/W value (and this is determined by
> the code who uses this value, if it is dynamic then let
> the parameter be R/W, if it's only used to make assumptions
> in the init phase then it must be R/O).
>
> - it can be shown to everybody, or only root should be able
> to read the value (0400 vs 0440/0444). I'm not sure this is
> really useful since /etc/modprobe.conf is generaly 0644,
> but it could be in some cases...
I don't have an argument with most of that, but I am concerned
about how much memory each entry requires and how useful it really
is. IOW, if I need to know the module parameters for a module,
I can probably find that info somewhere else, like in
/etc/modprobe.conf or a script etc., so why waste memory on it?
But then there's the question of if someone else needs to know
the module parameters that were used, where do they look?
I could say: same answer as I gave above.
Or you could say: exposed in /sys.
If memory usage is not an issue, I'll agree.
--
~Randy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-10 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-04 11:27 [PATCH RESEND] pcmcia network drivers cleanup Stelian Pop
2004-11-05 2:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-05 8:32 ` Stelian Pop
2004-11-10 15:59 ` Stelian Pop
2004-11-10 16:00 ` [PATCH] drivers/net/pcmcia: use module_param() instead of MODULE_PARM() Stelian Pop
2004-11-10 16:35 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-11-10 19:52 ` Stelian Pop
2004-11-10 19:47 ` Randy.Dunlap [this message]
2004-11-10 21:21 ` Stelian Pop
2004-11-13 22:44 ` Dominik Brodowski
2004-11-10 16:01 ` [PATCH] drivers/net/pcmcia: rework debugging Stelian Pop
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=41927055.9030306@osdl.org \
--to=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.de \
--cc=stelian@popies.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox