[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] drivers/net/pcmcia: use module_param() instead of MODULE_PARM()
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,
>>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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.056 / U:22.600 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site