On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 09:53:47AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > Curious, are these users setting up the param structure dynamically > or something that they can pass along bogus values? > > If that's the case then yes, I definitely agree.
It's just a quality of implementation issue. This is a generic API. Sure for early-boot users like yours it makes sense to just WARN_ON rather than deal with the messy hash table allocation failure. But for a driver author writing some kernel module it isn't nice to WARN_ON and then crash on a NULL-pointer dereference when we can cleanly fail the table init. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
