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]

Date:	Sat, 5 Apr 2008 08:29:00 +1000
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Marc Pignat <marc.pignat@...s.ch>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Tom Horsley <tom.horsley@...r.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>
Subject: Re: module parameters versus kernel command line

On Friday 04 April 2008 21:45:37 Marc Pignat wrote:
> On Friday 04 April 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
> ...
>
> > The second is that users might be surprised when they take
> > the 'usbcore.blinkenlights' line out of their modprobe config file and it
> > still applies.  Most users use everything-is-a-module distributions.
>
> Why don't do it in user space (let insmod/modprobe parse /proc/cmdline)?
> 1. Users won't be surprised after looking at the new man pages:)
> 2. it will work with older kernel
>
> The warning problem is more complicated to fix.

I like this idea, and also have module tools ship with 
a 'check-kernel-cmdline' tool which handles the warnings for unusable cmdline 
params.  Distributions can run this in their init scripts, and we can remove 
the warning from the kernel.

The best bit about this idea: it's now Jon's problem :)

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/