linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI: thinkpad-acpi: change thinkpad-acpi input default and kconfig help

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070816122506.GA5081@khazad-dum.debian.net>
Date:	Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:25:06 -0300
From:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc:	lenb@...nel.org, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI: thinkpad-acpi: change thinkpad-acpi input
	default and kconfig help

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > I *can* make the compile-time option a module parameter, though.  That
> > wouldn't be much of a problem, and the compile-time option would select the
> > default for that parameter, but it would be easier to override it at run
> > time (you can already do it, but it requires reprogramming various driver
> > parameters using sysfs and the input device IOCTLs).
> > 
> > Would a module parameter address enough of your concerns?  Kconfig would
> > only set the default for that parameter, then...
> 
> I really think modifying defaults it not a great idea.
> What about adding a writeable module parameter?
> Then new HAL would just write to /sysfs/module/thinkpad/parameters/interface_version to 
> switch to new behaviour.

Nah. This thing regulates what the module has to do when it loads and inits
the firmware, and the whole point of the new behaviour is to get userspace
to be as hands' off as possible, so that we can auto-tune things better
in-kernel, without a need to worry about HAL and friends overwriting local
admin configurations needlessly.

I will probably have to do something like the strict versioned interfaces of
wireless extensions, I think.  It really is a case of a deprecation of
current userland interfaces done sanely.  Right now I am thinking about
giving userland two kernel releases before I change the default interface
level, and one to two years to remove the older ones.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/