linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [mcelog] Start using the new sysfs tunables location

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 12:10:17 +0530
From:	"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, ak@...ux.intel.com, bp@...64.org,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, ananth@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [mcelog] Start using the new sysfs tunables location

On 09/06/2012 12:39 AM, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 04:02:37PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>>> All the current mce tunables are now available under
>>> /sys/devices/system/machinecheck. Start using this new location, but fall back
>>> to the older per-cpu location so that we continue working with older kernels.
>>
>> Who did that change in the kernel?
>>
>> That breaks Linus rule that the kernel should not break userland.
>> Kernel needs to fix that.
>
> The change is still under discussion. Stage one is to add the new global
> pathnames in addition to keeping the old per-cpu ones. Also fix all utilities
> (just mcelog(8) as far as we know) to prefer the new paths.
>
> After some time[1] ... delete the old paths. This is allowable under Linus'
> modified edict that you can change ABI "if nobody complains". If we wait
> long enough that the new mcelog is widely deployed, then nobody should
> complain.
>
> -Tony
>
> [1] several years - not just a kernel release or two.
>

Tony,
Thanks for clarifying. I should have mentioned in the patch description 
that this is indeed subject to the original patch making it into the kernel.

On a related topic. I recently noticed that we don't have an entry for 
machinecheck in Documentation/ABI/. Should we add an entry in there? We 
could perhaps add the existing entries under obsolete/ and the new 
location under testing/?


- Naveen

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/