On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 09:53:47AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:

Curious, are these users setting up the param structure dynamically
or something that they can pass along bogus values?

If that's the case then yes, I definitely agree.

It's just a quality of implementation issue.  This is a generic API.
Sure for early-boot users like yours it makes sense to just WARN_ON
rather than deal with the messy hash table allocation failure.

But for a driver author writing some kernel module it isn't nice
to WARN_ON and then crash on a NULL-pointer dereference when we
can cleanly fail the table init.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt