Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> writes: > On 9/9/24 11:11 PM, Ajay.Kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > [...] > >>>> Does it make sense to add a module parameter for device type(wilc1000 or >>>> wilc3000) to address device-specific featurization. >>> >>> We don't do hacks like that in upstream, it's expected that the driver >>> does this all automatically. >> >> Marek has already submitted the patch to delay calling >> wiphy_register() so it >> should work at run time for both the devices. >> I'm just curious to know for which scenario the module parameters should be >> used. Can it be used for enabling or disabling any feature, configuring any >> parameters, instead of complete device-specific featurization. > > Module parameters are applicable for tunables which cannot be > otherwise configured at runtime. Runtime configuration is always > preferable. For the wilc, I don't think there is anything which has to > be a module parameter, maybe firmware filename could be it. Nowadays module parameters are frowned upon, apparently some subsystems have even banned adding new module parameters. In wireless we have been more lax and have allowed new module parameters in some cases with good justification, but it's still rare. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
