netdev - Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 0/5] net: hwmon fixes

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:34:03 +0100
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Nithin Nayak Sujir <nsujir@...adcom.com>,
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>,
	Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	<lm-sensors@...sensors.org>, Greg Rose <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
	"Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
	Carolyn Wyborny <carolyn.wyborny@...el.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 0/5] net: hwmon fixes

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 18:56:26 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 19:23 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 17:15:50 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > We don't attach them to the hwmon device either, and I would rather not
> > > change that yet because lm-sensors 2 is still widely used.
> > 
> > Mouahahahah.
> > 
> > No, seriously, it's not.
> 
> RHEL 5 has it, and that is widely used - even with recent mainline
> kernels, in some cases.

RHEL 5 comes with kernel 2.6.18, which isn't exactly recent. I very
much doubt a significant share of users dare to use a brand new kernel
on such an old distribution. And if they do, then there are several
packages which need to be updated (udev, kernel-firmware...),
lm-sensors is only one of them, and the user should be aware of that.

> > And lm-sensors 2 doesn't even support your
> > device so this is a totally moot point.
> 
> I thought it did work with arbitrary devices providing the right
> attributes, but obviously I misremembered.

This is how lm-sensors 3 works. But lm-sensors 2 needs explicit support
for each and every device. Which is exactly why version 2 sucked and
nobody should be using it any longer.

> So there's no reason not to change.  Thanks.

Good to hear :)

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html