linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] rust: extend `module!` macro with integer parameter support

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: <2024121309-lethargic-ended-5f99@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:23:24 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	Adam Bratschi-Kaye <ark.email@...il.com>,
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] rust: extend `module!` macro with integer
 parameter support

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 01:24:42PM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> "Greg KH" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:30:45PM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> >> This series extends the `module!` macro with support module parameters.
> >
> > Eeek, why?
> >
> > Module parameters are from the 1990's, back when we had no idea what we
> > were doing and thought that a simple "one variable for a driver that
> > controls multiple devices" was somehow a valid solution :)
> >
> > Please only really add module parameters if you can prove that you
> > actually need a module parameter.
> 
> I really need module parameters to make rust null block feature
> compatible with C null block.

Is that a requirement?  That wasn't documented here :(

You should have put the user of these apis in the series as you have
that code already in the tree, right?

> Let's not block interfacing parts of the kernel because we decided that
> the way we (well not me, I was not around) did things in the 80's was
> less than stellar. I mean, we would get nowhere.

On the contrary, if we don't learn from our past mistakes, we will
constantly keep making them and prevent others from "doing the right
thing" by default.

I would strongly prefer that any driver not have any module parameters
at all, as drivers don't work properly that way (again, they need to
handle multiple devices, which does not work for a module parameter.)

That's why we created sysfs, configfs, and lots of other things, to
learn from our past mistakes.

thanks,

greg k-h