Re: [PATCH 2.6] Add missing MODULE_PARAM to dummy.c (and MAINTAINERShip)

[Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>]

* Jose Luis Domingo Lopez (linux-kernel@24x7linux.com) wrote:
> On Thursday, 08 April 2004, at 10:54:40 -0700,
> Chris Wright wrote:
> 
> > this is going backwards.  module_param is the newer (preferred) interface.
> > 
> I (incorrectly) based my assumptions on the fact that "modinfo dummy"
> didn't return any information about the module parameter. I also had a
> look at some other modules, like "bonding", "rtl8139", and I assumed
> that the MODULE_* macros were the 2.6.x way of doing things.

It's a mix.  module_param(), MODULE_PARM_DESC(), MODULE_LICENSE(),
MODULE_AUTHOR(), MODULE_DESCRIPTION().

So the whole patch isn't bad, just the bit like:
-module_param()
+MODULE_PARM()

> I was obviously wrong, sorry for the waste of time (anyways, it seems
> there are several kernel modules waiting to be updated, maybe I should
> give them a look and learn something and try to "fix" them).

Sure, although some of these changes may not be accepted simply because
they create noise, patch conflicts etc at a time where stability is more
important.  So new code should use the new ones, old code may not all be
converted for some time.

thanks,
-chris
-- 
Linux Security Modules     http://lsm.immunix.org     http://lsm.bkbits.net