[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Delegate unknown module parameters to interested parties
    On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:26:00 am Steven Rostedt wrote:
    > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 16:21 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
    > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:09:21 am Steven Rostedt wrote:
    > > > [ Added Rusty "Module God" Russell ]
    > >
    > > And I also wrote the parameter parsing code, so sending to me is probably
    > > a good idea.
    > >
    > > So, what's this for? You want trace= as a standard module parameter
    > Yep, this way we could even enable tracepoints that are in the init
    > section.

    *Exactly* how would it be used though? Please provide a synopsis for
    someone unaware of what tracing does these days?

    Because we could compile an extra module_parm() into the module using
    modpost, for example, at a cost of an extra 16/32 bytes per module.

    > But, personally, I like the generic addition. Perhaps others will hook into
    > it without fear of having to hack the module code, which can be quite
    > intimidating to some.

    We *all* want to build infrastructure; when other coders are forced to use
    it we rise up the kernel dominance hierarchy. Ook ook! (Every Unix app has
    its own config language for the same reason: the author distils the mental
    sweat of the users into some kind of Elixer of Coder Hubris).

    Yet abstractions obfuscate: let's resist our primal urges to add another
    speed hump on the lengthening road to kernel expertese.

    And this one's classicly easy: in single uses cases we always get the
    infrastructure wrong for future users anyway, so let's not do it until
    we have more than one user.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-11-11 01:37    [W:0.020 / U:0.284 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site