On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Rusty Russell <ru...@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: > "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com> writes: >> Sure. But my point that started this subthread was: should we take the >> opportunity now to add a 'flags' argument to the new finit_module() >> system call, so as to allow flexibility in extending the behavior in >> future? There have been so many cases of revised system calls in the >> past few years that replaced calls without a 'flags' argument that it >> seems worth at least some thought before the API is cast in stone. > > (CC's trimmed, Lucas & Jon added; please include them in module > discussions!) > > So I tried to think of why we'd want flags; if I could think of a > plausible reason, obviously we should do it now. > > I think it would be neat for the force flags (eg. ignoring modversions > or ignoring kernel version). These are the only cases where libkmod > needs to mangle the module. > > So here's the patch which adds the flags field, but nothing in there > yet. I'll add the remove flags soon, so libkmod can assume that if the > syscall exists, those flags will work. > > Thoughts? > Rusty. > > FIX: add flags arg to sys_finit_module() > > Thanks to Michael Kerrisk for keeping us honest.
w00t! Thanks, Rusty ;-). Acked-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com> > + if (flags) > + return -EINVAL; And thanks for that check. So easy, so obvious, and so often forgotten. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
