Messages in this thread |  | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] add kernel parameter to disable module load | Date | Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:29:56 +1030 |
| |
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:44:50 +0800, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> wrote: > On 01/29/2012 08:51 AM, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:34:50 +0800, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Sometimes we need to test a kernel of same version with code or config > >> option changes. > >> > >> We already have sysctl to disable module load, but add a kernel > >> parameter will be more convenient. > > > > > >> +static int __init module_load_disable(char *str) > >> +{ > >> + modules_disabled = 1; > >> + return 1; > >> +} > >> +__setup("nomodule", module_load_disable); > > > > You misspelled core_param here :) > > > > > Hello Rusty, If use core_param I'd better to change modules_disabled > from int to bool or we must pass nomodule=1 instead of simply pass > nomodule. But I think I can firstly post the core_param patch with > current int type, then work on the transition patch for the variable > type changes, what do you think?
You could code your set function, but "bint" is what you want. Cleaning it up to be a bool is a good idea too.
> Another do you think we need to expose this to sysfs via core_param? > According to the sysctl code looks like we should not add sysfs > interface to allow transition from "1" to "0"
If you want it writable, you definitely want to code your own set function so it's one way. But perm 0 or 0444 make sense, too.
Cheers, Rusty.
|  |