linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] powerpc: booke_wdt: Fix build error as a module

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: <CAJhHMCB_3x7479WUkipA+S8i6EwqCWxjzXZSW64Aaa-i-_GR8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2014 15:18:09 -0400
From:	Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
To:	Guenter <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	"open list:WATCHDOG DEVICE D..." <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: booke_wdt: Fix build error as a module

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Guenter <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:55:44PM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>> Building booke_wdt fails when trying to build as a module as there is no
>> early_param() in module. Fix by using module_param() instead of early_param().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
>> CC: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>> ---
>>  drivers/watchdog/booke_wdt.c | 28 +++++-----------------------
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/booke_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/booke_wdt.c
>> index 08a7853..65f5e9f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/booke_wdt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/booke_wdt.c
>> @@ -30,8 +30,6 @@
>>   * occur, and the final time the board will reset.
>>   */
>>
>> -u32 booke_wdt_enabled;
>> -u32 booke_wdt_period = CONFIG_BOOKE_WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT;
>>
>>  #ifdef       CONFIG_PPC_FSL_BOOK3E
>>  #define WDTP(x)              ((((x)&0x3)<<30)|(((x)&0x3c)<<15))
>> @@ -41,27 +39,10 @@ u32 booke_wdt_period = CONFIG_BOOKE_WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT;
>>  #define WDTP_MASK    (TCR_WP_MASK)
>>  #endif
>>
>> -/* Checks wdt=x and wdt_period=xx command-line option */
>> -notrace int __init early_parse_wdt(char *p)
>> -{
>> -     if (p && strncmp(p, "0", 1) != 0)
>> -             booke_wdt_enabled = 1;
>> -
>> -     return 0;
>> -}
>> -early_param("wdt", early_parse_wdt);
>> -
>> -int __init early_parse_wdt_period(char *p)
>> -{
>> -     unsigned long ret;
>> -     if (p) {
>> -             if (!kstrtol(p, 0, &ret))
>> -                     booke_wdt_period = ret;
>> -     }
>> -
>> -     return 0;
>> -}
>> -early_param("wdt_period", early_parse_wdt_period);
>> +static bool booke_wdt_enabled = true;
>
> Any reason for changing the default from false to true ?
> Unless you have a reaslly good reason, I don't think that is a good idea.

I don't see where it was being set to false. It is
uninitialized AFAICT. Does that mean that it is false? (I thought only
static variables got that default).

>
>> +module_param(booke_wdt_enabled, bool, 0444);
>> +static int  booke_wdt_period = CONFIG_BOOKE_WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT;
>> +module_param(booke_wdt_period, int, 0444);
>>
> Also not sure if it adds value to have the module parameters visible
> from user space. Why not use 0 for the permission flags ?
>

I have no objection to your suggestion. But not sure if such paranoia
is warranted :)

-- 
Pranith
--
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/