linux-kernel - Re: "ide=reverse" do we still need this?

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:	Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:46:35 +0100
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To:	michael@...erman.id.au
CC:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, bzolnier@...il.com, muli@...ibm.com,
	jdmason@...zu.us, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	discuss@...-64.org
Subject: Re: "ide=reverse" do we still need this?

On 13-02-08 13:16, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 13:06 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
>> On 13-02-08 05:44, Greg KH wrote:
>>
>>>> While details escape me somewhat again at the monment, a few months ago
>>>> I was playing around with a PCI Promise IDE controller and needed
>>>> ide=reverse to save me from having to switch disks around to still have
>>>> a bootable system.
>>>>
>>>> Or some such. Not too clear anymore, but I remember it saved the day.
>>> You couldn't just change the boot disk in grub?
>>>
>>> Or use an initramfs and /dev/disk/by-id/ to keep any future moves stable?
>> No. The thing is that you need these kinds of hacks while messing with old 
>> systems, building and stripping them, often in recovery type of situations.
>>
>> As said (same as the other person I saw reacting) details of what was most 
>> decidedly needed last time around escape me at the moment, but ide=reverse 
>> is the kind of hack that saves one hours of unscrewing computer cases and 
>> switching disks around while building stuff, making quick tests, doing 
>> recovery...
>>
>> If it must go for the greater architectural good, so be it, but it's the 
>> type of thing that's used specifically in the situations where you don't 
>> have stable, well arranged (or known!) setups to begin with.
> 
> I might be off the deep end, but isn't this what
> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is for?

Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is for asking/discussing whether 
or not features should be removed? No, I don't think so. It seems to be a 
schedule of when to remove features.

Rene.


--
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/