From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752858AbcFNRRG (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:17:06 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:60669 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751747AbcFNRRD (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:17:03 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 10:17:02 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Prarit Bhargava Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Rusty Russell , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add kernel parameter to blacklist modules Message-ID: <20160614171702.GA20693@infradead.org> References: <1465821161-13889-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1465821161-13889-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 08:32:41AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > Blacklisting a module in linux has long been a problem. The process of > blacklisting a module has changed over time, and it seems that every OS > does it slightly differently and depends on the age of the init system > used on that OS. And why would we care about blacklisting a module?