module_param_named_unsafe(9)

πŸ“¦ version 7.3.1, in nixpkgs unstable

πŸ’– module_param_named_unsafe(9) β€” Kernel API Manual πŸ’–

okay bestie, welcome to module_param_named_unsafe(9) from the Kernel API Manual β€” yes, the manual name is right there, we’re being cute and accurate today 🫢


🌟 NAME 🌟

module_param_named_unsafe β€” same as module_param_named but taints kernel 😭

bestie, the β€œunsafe” is not a vibe check, it taints kernel. It’s literally in the name. πŸ’€

✨ SYNOPSIS ✨

the whole call looks exactly like this, no cap:

module_param_named_unsafe (name , value , type , perm );

πŸŽ€ ARGUMENTS πŸŽ€

  • name β€” a valid C identifier which is the parameter name. so like, actually valid C, bestie β€” this is the parameter’s name ✨
  • value β€” the actual lvalue to alter. not a copy, the actual lvalue β€” main character energy 🎯
  • type β€” the type of the parameter. the type, periodt πŸ¦‹
  • perm β€” visibility in sysfs. this controls the visibility in sysfs πŸ‘‘

πŸ¦‹ SEE ALSO πŸ¦‹

Kernel file ./include/linux/moduleparam.h says hiii, and the whole friend group is:


that’s the whole page, bestie 🫢 β€” from ./include/linux, dated October 2026, and it’s literally module_param_named_unsafe(9). mwah πŸ’‹βœ¨

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from