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  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:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 15:01:39 +0000
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next-2020-12-03

On 07/12/2020 20:10, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:35:53 -0800 Brian Norris wrote:
>> Is there some reference for this rule (e.g., dictate from on high; or
>> some explanation of reasons)? Or limitations on it?
> 
> TBH its one of those "widely accepted truth" in networking which was
> probably discussed before I started compiling kernels so I don't know
> the full background.

My understanding is that it's because users can have them in their
 modprobe.conf, which causes breakage if an update removes the param.
 I think the module insert fails if there are unrecognised parameters
 there.

>> this sounds like one could never drop a module parameter, or remove
>> obsolete features.
Not far from the truth.  If you stop the network from coming up on
 boot you can really ruin a sysadmin's day :-/
But usually you can remove the feature, and leave the modparam not
 connected to anything, except maybe a deprecation warning printk if
 it's set to something other than the default.

-ed

Powered by blists - more mailing lists