linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] rust: add parameter support to the `module!` macro

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: <2025010953-saint-share-fc41@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:27:10 +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>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	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, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
	Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] rust: add parameter support to the `module!` macro

On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 11:54:59AM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> This patch includes changes required for Rust kernel modules to utilize
> module parameters. This code implements read only support for integer
> types without `sysfs` support.

I know you want to keep this simple for now, but will you have to go and
touch all users of this when you do add the sysfs support later?  sysfs
wants the mode of the file to be set here, so how do you think of that
happening?  And don't you need that for your null block driver?

Also, what about all the other "types" of module parameters that are
currently able to be done, like call-back, hardware control, and unsafe?
Are we just not going to do that for rust code (no objection from me,
just wanting to be sure.)

thanks,

greg k-h