Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758851AbXEMSWp (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 May 2007 14:22:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757411AbXEMSWj (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 May 2007 14:22:39 -0400 Received: from noname.neutralserver.com ([70.84.186.210]:49556 "EHLO noname.neutralserver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757372AbXEMSWi (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 May 2007 14:22:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 21:22:26 +0300 From: Dan Aloni To: Michael Tokarev Cc: Stephen Hemminger , Linux Kernel List Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow kernel module exclusion on load Message-ID: <20070513182226.GA8658@localdomain> References: <20070513132517.GA14038@localdomain> <20070513092352.18cd80de@freepuppy> <20070513171555.GA27920@localdomain> <46475324.7050303@msgid.tls.msk.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46475324.7050303@msgid.tls.msk.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - noname.neutralserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - monatomic.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1552 Lines: 34 On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 10:04:20PM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: > There are two issues (IMHO anyway), both are userspace. > > First is the ability blacklist the given module from bootloader. > My initramfs has it since the beginning - it allows a noload=xxx > paramerer (comma-separated list of module patterns, cumulative), > for exactly this purpose. I implemented modprobe in shell (not > using a binary from module-init-tools) for initramfs (it's some > 20 lines of shell code). Because of exactly that reason - on > certain systems i had a problem with certain drivers, resulting > in boot failures. Later on, this set of modules gets transformed > into a modprobe blacklist list. It's trivial to do. > > And second is what to do with direct insmod invocations in minimal > embedded system startup sequence. Well, minimal it or not, but > shell is present anyhow, so I don't see any problem with that, > either... Yes, I guess a shell script can always look at /proc/cmdline with relatively minimal complexity. Anyway, it all boils down to whether there's a developer demand for a userspace-independent way of blacklisting modules. Let's see if more people post their opinion so we can determine. -- Dan Aloni XIV LTD, http://www.xivstorage.com da-x (at) monatomic.org, dan (at) xiv.co.il - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/