Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 May 2023 16:54:23 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] clk: imx: imx93: introduce clk_bypassed module parameter | From | Peng Fan <> |
| |
On 5/10/2023 5:13 PM, Greg KH wrote: > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button > > > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 07:49:20AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: >> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: imx: imx93: introduce clk_bypassed module >>> parameter >>> >>> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 04:55:06PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: >>>> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >>>> >>>> With the clk names specified in clk_bypassed module parameter, give >>>> user an option to bypass the clk from managing them by Linux kernel. >>> >>> As I said on another email, no, please do not add new module parameters >>> for drivers, this is not the 1990s >> >> After a search of the list, >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=module_param >> >> I still see many drivers are adding module_param. > > And they should not be doing so as it is almost always not a good idea > (note, some subsystems, like sound, do require it, as that's the api > they use, so this is not a blanket statement.) > >> Is this is strict ban that new platform driver should not add >> module_param? > > You need to really really really justify, and document in the changelog > text, why all of the other methods of configuring a platform driver will > not work in order to have it considered.
I just wanna use the module parateter to give user a choice to choose to bypass some clocks. There are 100+ clocks in the driver. Different user may wanna different configuration. With device tree, it is not flexible.Such as user A may wanna bypass clock X, Y; user B may wanna bypass clock Z.
With module parameter, I could easily set it in bootargs.
But anyway if this is not preferred, I need to find other way.
Thanks, Peng. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
| |