On Tue, 03 Apr 2018, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote: > On 2018-04-03 11:02 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: >> Agreed with the naming mess. But OTOH, it's already a thing that is >> too popular to kill. You can add a more suitable option name, but you >> cannot drop these existing ones easily. It's already in a gray zone >> of the golden "don't break user-space" rule. > > That's quite a stretch argument, given that amdgpu has never supported > the modeset parameter. That much is clear. > Also, module parameters aren't UAPI. [citation needed]. I agree with Takashi it's a gray area. You can have "unsafe" module parameters that taint the kernel when set, see module_param_unsafe and module_param_named_unsafe. Using those should make it clear all bets are off. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
