On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Rusty Russell wrote:
> I've applied this cleanup on top, however.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
>
> Subject: param: check for tainting before calling set op.
>
> This means every set op doesn't need to call it, and it can move into
> params.c.
Much better, thanks. I was looking for a
Daniel Vetter writes:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Jani Nikula writes:
>>> This is a generic version of Daniel's patch [1] letting us have unsafe
>>> module parameters (experimental, debugging, testing, etc.) that taint
>>> the kernel when set. Quoting Daniel,
>>
>
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Jani Nikula writes:
>> This is a generic version of Daniel's patch [1] letting us have unsafe
>> module parameters (experimental, debugging, testing, etc.) that taint
>> the kernel when set. Quoting Daniel,
>
> OK, I think the idea is fine,
Jani Nikula writes:
> This is a generic version of Daniel's patch [1] letting us have unsafe
> module parameters (experimental, debugging, testing, etc.) that taint
> the kernel when set. Quoting Daniel,
OK, I think the idea is fine, but we'll probably only want this for
a few types (eg. int and
This is a generic version of Daniel's patch [1] letting us have unsafe
module parameters (experimental, debugging, testing, etc.) that taint
the kernel when set. Quoting Daniel,
"""
Users just love to set random piles of options since surely enabling all
the experimental stuff helps. Later on we g
