"Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:30:49PM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >> This patch includes changes required for Rust kernel modules to utilize >> module parameters. This code implements read only support for integer >> types without `sysfs` support. > > read-only is VERY limited, and as such, only good for boot options, > which as I mentioned before, is not how any "modern" kernel driver > should be doing things. I only added what is required to get rust null block compatibility going. I did not want to add dead code - I heard that is frowned upon. > And no sysfs interaction? That's going to confuse the heck out of > people wondering why the option they added doesn't show up in the same > place it normally would if they did it in C, right? Not that I'm saying > this should be done at all, just that this is going to be confusing > right off the bat which is probably not a good idea. No, these work the same way as their counter parts in C. They reuse the same C machinery. They just only allow the user to specify a subset of the permission flags. The C null_blk parameters are actually configured to appear read-only in sysfs. I guess I should add that in a follow-up. > Friends don't let friends add new module parameters to the kernel :) OK, that makes sense. But I'm trying to build something that plugs in where we currently have a piece of C code that relies on module parameters. Jens, would you be OK with Rust null block only providing configuration through configfs? Best regards, Andreas Hindborg
