linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] UBI: block: Implement kernel_param

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:	Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:15:43 -0300
From:	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:	dedekind1@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	computersforpeace@...il.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] UBI: block: Implement kernel_param_ops->get()

Hi Richard,

On Mar 19, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> The ->get() function is not optional.
> 

[..]
>  static struct kernel_param_ops ubiblock_param_ops = {
>  	.set    = ubiblock_set_param,
> +	.get	= param_get_charp,
>  };
>  module_param_cb(block, &ubiblock_param_ops, NULL, 0);

The comment for the function says they are both optional:

/**
 * module_param_cb - general callback for a module/cmdline parameter
 * @name: a valid C identifier which is the parameter name.
 * @ops: the set & get operations for this parameter.
 * @perm: visibility in sysfs.
 *
 * The ops can have NULL set or get functions.
 */

This has no visibility in sysfs, so I can't see how having a NULL
get() is a problem. What's the issue you're trying to fix here?

Maybe I'm missing something?
-- 
Ezequiel García, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
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/