linux-kernel - Re: module parameters versus kernel command line

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: <47F5067D.9070400@nortel.com>
Date:	Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:31:57 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Tom Horsley <tom.horsley@...r.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: module parameters versus kernel command line

Tom Horsley wrote:

> I know that part, I'm just wondering if it would be nice to have
> even dynamically loaded modules notice the kernel option
> so that the "usbcore" module would see the "blinkenlights=1"
> parameter from the kernel boot options when dynamically loaded?

What if the module is loaded with parameters, and parameters are also 
specified in the kernel command line?

I'd suggest that the dynamic parameter should probably take precedence, 
as that would allow the user to specify things that were not necessarily 
known at boot time, while still providing a boot-time fallback.

Chris
--
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/