From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753545Ab2AaDdq (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:33:46 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32542 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752554Ab2AaDdq (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:33:46 -0500 Message-ID: <4F2761B2.7080207@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:36:18 +0800 From: Dave Young User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110323 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] add kernel parameter to disable module load References: <20120128033450.GA2138@darkstar> <87vcnvbab1.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <4F2755A2.5040108@redhat.com> <871uqglgpf.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <871uqglgpf.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/31/2012 10:59 AM, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:44:50 +0800, Dave Young wrote: >> On 01/29/2012 08:51 AM, Rusty Russell wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:34:50 +0800, Dave Young 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. Thanks. I will try bint. Will consider to make it bool later because sysctl also need some changes. > >> 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. I like 'perm 0' :) > > Cheers, > Rusty. > -- > 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/ -- Thanks Dave