Module parameters reimplementation 0/4
Quoted 9 lines · Rusty
Quoted 4 lines · Jgarzik
Let's be more friendly to the namespace and call it something less ambiguous, like
MODULE_PARAM, even if that might not be strictly true in 1% of the cases. IMO there are certainly valid local uses of 'PARAM' in kernel code.I disagree. It's a param, subsuming both
__setupandMODULE_PARAM. The fact that it is implemented for modules is not something for the driver author to be concerned about (finally).
You're both wrong ;-) module' != loadable module'. module_init() means this is where you initialise this module', whether it's built-in or synamically loaded. MODULE_PARAM() should mean this is a parameter for this module', whether it's built-in or dynamically loaded.
Signature · 1 line
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
In message <[email protected]> you write:
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines · Rusty
Quoted 4 lines · Jgarzik
Let's be more friendly to the namespace and call it something less ambiguous, like
MODULE_PARAM, even if that might not be strictly true in 1% of the cases. IMO there are certainly valid local uses of 'PARAM' in kernel code.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I disagree. It's a param, subsuming both
__setupandMODULE_PARAM. The fact that it is implemented for modules is not something for the driver author to be concerned about (finally).You're both wrong ;-)
module' !=loadable module'.
Now we're descending into sophistry. But PARAM() is useful in (say) init/main.c, as well, and it's a stretch to call it a module...
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.