On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:05 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 05:09:11PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 06:52:00AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On 6/5/20 3:50 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:24 PM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Am 2020-06-05 10:14, schrieb Andy Shevchenko: > > > >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:14 AM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > >>>> +static bool nowayout = WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT; > > > >>>> +module_param(nowayout, bool, 0); > > > >>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nowayout, "Watchdog cannot be stopped once started > > > >>>> (default=" > > > >>>> + __MODULE_STRING(WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT) > > > >>>> ")"); > > > >>>> + > > > >>>> +static int timeout; > > > >>>> +module_param(timeout, int, 0); > > > >>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(timeout, "Initial watchdog timeout in seconds"); > > > >>> > > > >>> Guenter ACKed this, but I'm wondering why we still need module > > > >>> parameters... > > > >> > > > >> How would a user change the nowayout or the timeout? For the latter > > > >> there is > > > >> a device tree entry, but thats not easy changable by the user. > > > > > > > > Yes, it's more question to VIm and Guenter than to you. > > > > > > > > > > Has support for providing module parameters with the kernel command line > > > been discontinued/deprecated, or did it run out of favor ? Sorry if I > > > missed that. > > > > Latter according to Greg KH. One of the (plenty) examples [1]. > > > > [1]: https://www.mail-archive.com/driverdev-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg96495.html > > > What is the suggested replacement ? In some mails he suggested to use sysfs. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
