Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:39:40 +0000 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Module parameters reimplementation 0/4 |
| |
Rusty wrote: > Jgarzik wrote: > > Let's be more friendly to the namespace and call it something less > > ambiguous, like MODULE_PARAM, even if that might not be strictly true in > > 1% of the cases. IMO there are certainly valid local uses of 'PARAM' in > > kernel code. > > I disagree. It's a param, subsuming both __setup and MODULE_PARAM. > The fact that it is implemented for modules is not something for the > driver author to be concerned about (finally).
You're both wrong ;-) `module' != `loadable module'. module_init() means `this is where you initialise this module', whether it's built-in or synamically loaded. MODULE_PARAM() should mean `this is a parameter for this module', whether it's built-in or dynamically loaded.
-- Revolutions do not require corporate support. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |