From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>
Cc: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org,
casey@schaufler-ca.com, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] kernel/params.c: generalize bool_enable_only
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:22:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150423152249.GK10738@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429739711-9415-4-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>
Hello,
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 02:55:06PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> +int param_set_bool_enable_only(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> +{
> + int err = 0;
> + bool new_value;
> + bool orig_value = *(bool *)kp->arg;
> + struct kernel_param dummy_kp = *kp;
> +
> + dummy_kp.arg = &new_value;
> +
> + err = param_set_bool(val, &dummy_kp);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + /* Don't let them unset it once it's set! */
> + if (!new_value && orig_value)
> + return -EROFS;
I know that this was moved from another place but as we're making it
generic now I'm a bit curious about -EROFS. Wouldn't -EINVAL be a
more conventional choice here?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-23 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-22 21:55 [PATCH v2 0/8] module params: few simplifications Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] kernel/params: constify struct kernel_param_ops uses Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] kernel/module.c: use generic module param operaters for sig_enforce Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] kernel/params.c: generalize bool_enable_only Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-23 15:22 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-04-23 17:00 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] moduleparam.h: add module_param_config_*() helpers Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-23 2:15 ` Rusty Russell
2015-04-23 19:33 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] kernel/workqueue.c: remove ifdefs over wq_power_efficient Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] kernel/workqueue.c: use module_param_config_on_off() for power_efficient Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] kernel/module.c: avoid ifdefs for sig_enforce declaration Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-04-22 21:55 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] kernel/module.c: use module_param_config_on() for sig_enforce Luis R. Rodriguez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150423152249.GK10738@htj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.com \
--cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®