From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 186924A21; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:38:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734104322; cv=none; b=D0QeL6hnqKwtDpR//ROr74JHfE5CCZo/aQUTZczIcDZQ9+s4hFBJpDGVJXNighJPkjuB20rz4lCs2CBnIB3cABR4BxI0xiLY7PAHyfjSUn4zl2zUVneJJOlOEUFrrFJCZ3kGZxiDaR1OJrB91I65NZC7TI6w38+6JWonwhCT2po= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734104322; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TtiwPZnc3uU5RWhUI34AYaSZu4sDmkVKjXOgaG/22rI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VaMPw411G7TnUoR0d3Aq+efoc9+IzCVXEsVMdYFPY1auRy7gSLTCov6KmNb8aPgpGVUfQTow+gJbenASVbaQF2hqIlcnK0JXraHE54DuENnoeZwiFD5camDWsbcecvHxNfpNDnrE+Na9YxaB1SUc8Qg7yqd2TUgCQbIS/nETwnA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=T+IUII5/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="T+IUII5/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D688BC4CED0; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:38:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1734104321; bh=TtiwPZnc3uU5RWhUI34AYaSZu4sDmkVKjXOgaG/22rI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=T+IUII5/1JTeyOp7rVWdv3iLnpqyRq17m04K01cWcG6yhg+T45WsLQDziS/ux0IYY QyNh4pei4I+QKRaEL3GlB1EZtAbQMGThU1TckhIHzQg586aLMl2ZvDt1j5FR4tWYeG 0pe57rYM+5goUdu8FaIuZKh/yxitFZ4E2H3bUdJPHsNB1kUIUdNWFMbmiM+xt6ciVm 15kXXTXlIvboZpNJ/D7dlfHdarmycEYDgz7PBUFHFURGQ+eqdLgsgHRErWbH6/IIHV 5rmE1plnscvDSWCxuKzh0RX2FWnYuQfQIkZbwmGFREKRMd3X9Lz2u2xCWqLQaQE+DE Y2Ea2TfawSkgg== From: Andreas Hindborg To: "Greg KH" Cc: "Miguel Ojeda" , "Alex Gaynor" , "Boqun Feng" , "Gary Guo" , =?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn?= Roy Baron , "Benno Lossin" , "Alice Ryhl" , "Masahiro Yamada" , "Nathan Chancellor" , "Nicolas Schier" , "Trevor Gross" , "Adam Bratschi-Kaye" , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] rust: extend `module!` macro with integer parameter support In-Reply-To: <2024121309-lethargic-ended-5f99@gregkh> (Greg KH's message of "Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:23:24 +0100") References: <20241213-module-params-v3-v3-0-485a015ac2cf@kernel.org> <4Dsa69UGULRGsMbRbwOJNp_puyfsSSFt1QTcYU9AL4azd8vbfEFFtc7YNSsGegc40AfCZqVqZETfxg4TggUlSw==@protonmail.internalid> <2024121324-overdue-giggly-bdb8@gregkh> <87frmrepo5.fsf@kernel.org> <2024121309-lethargic-ended-5f99@gregkh> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 16:38:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87ttb7d24p.fsf@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Greg KH" writes: > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 01:24:42PM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >> "Greg KH" writes: >> >> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:30:45PM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >> >> This series extends the `module!` macro with support module parameters. >> > >> > Eeek, why? >> > >> > Module parameters are from the 1990's, back when we had no idea what we >> > were doing and thought that a simple "one variable for a driver that >> > controls multiple devices" was somehow a valid solution :) >> > >> > Please only really add module parameters if you can prove that you >> > actually need a module parameter. >> >> I really need module parameters to make rust null block feature >> compatible with C null block. > > Is that a requirement? That wasn't documented here :( > > You should have put the user of these apis in the series as you have > that code already in the tree, right? Sorry, my mistake. I'm trying to build a rust implementation of C null_blk, and one the bits I need for that is module parameters. > >> Let's not block interfacing parts of the kernel because we decided that >> the way we (well not me, I was not around) did things in the 80's was >> less than stellar. I mean, we would get nowhere. > > On the contrary, if we don't learn from our past mistakes, we will > constantly keep making them and prevent others from "doing the right > thing" by default. > > I would strongly prefer that any driver not have any module parameters > at all, as drivers don't work properly that way (again, they need to > handle multiple devices, which does not work for a module parameter.) > > That's why we created sysfs, configfs, and lots of other things, to > learn from our past mistakes. OK. I understand. It makes sense even :) I wish I knew that this was a thing before I spent spare cycles fixing this up for v3 though. I'm not getting a clear reading on the following, perhaps you can clarify: - Is the community aligned on dropping module parameters for all new drivers? - If so, was this decided upon at some point or is this a fluid decision that is just manifesting now? - Does this ban of module parameters also cover cases where backwards compatibility is desirable? - Can we merge this so I can move forward at my current projected course, or should I plan on dealing with not having this available? Best regards, Andreas Hindborg