On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Dne 3.7.2013 23:17, Andy Lutomirski napsal(a): >>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Dne 1.7.2013 18:33, Jonathan Masters napsal(a): >>>>> One caveat. Sometimes we have manufactured parameters intentionally >>>>> to cause a module to fail. We should standardize that piece. >>>> >>>> You have: >>>> >>>> blacklist foo >>>> >>>> to prevent udev from loading a module and >>>> >>>> install foo /bin/true >>>> >>>> to prevent modprobe from loading the module at all. What is the >>>> motivation for inventing a third way, through adding invalid parameters? >>>> >>> >>> FWIW, I've occasionally booted with modulename.garbage=1 to prevent >>> modulename from loading at boot. It may be worth adding a more >>> intentional way to do that. >> >> Hm, right, there seems to be no clean way to achieve this via a >> commandline argument. Maybe define a magic module option to tell the >> module loader not to load a module? > > modprobe.blacklist=modname1,modname2,... is already there, though all > the silliness of blacklist applies unless "-b" is passed (that's the > equivalent behavior of udev) That would probably be good enough for me. It would be neat if this worked for built-in "modules" as well, but that would probably be quite intrusive. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
