Re: [RFC PATCH] Allow optional module parameters

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Lucas De Marchi
<lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Dne 3.7.2013 23:17, Andy Lutomirski napsal(a):
>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Dne 1.7.2013 18:33, Jonathan Masters napsal(a):
>>>>> One caveat. Sometimes we have manufactured parameters intentionally
>>>>> to cause a module to fail. We should standardize that piece.
>>>>
>>>> You have:
>>>>
>>>>   blacklist foo
>>>>
>>>> to prevent udev from loading a module and
>>>>
>>>>   install foo /bin/true
>>>>
>>>> to prevent modprobe from loading the module at all. What is the
>>>> motivation for inventing a third way, through adding invalid parameters?
>>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, I've occasionally booted with modulename.garbage=1 to prevent
>>> modulename from loading at boot.  It may be worth adding a more
>>> intentional way to do that.
>>
>> Hm, right, there seems to be no clean way to achieve this via a
>> commandline argument. Maybe define a magic module option to tell the
>> module loader not to load a module?
>
> modprobe.blacklist=modname1,modname2,... is already there, though all
> the silliness of blacklist applies unless "-b" is passed (that's the
> equivalent behavior of udev)

That would probably be good enough for me.

It would be neat if this worked for built-in "modules" as well, but
that would probably be quite intrusive.

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/