linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Add /proc/mempool to display mempool usage

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]

Message-ID: <84144f020812011402v3cb3ab24pf5cb6310f2d00c5b@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 2 Dec 2008 00:02:09 +0200
From:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Matt Mackall" <mpm@...enic.com>, randy.dunlap@...cle.com,
	greg@...ah.com, adobriyan@...il.com, remi.colinet@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Add /proc/mempool to display mempool usage

Hi Linus,

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> Hmm, I thought Documentation/ABI/ was supposed to tell us what's an
>> ABI you can depend on and what's not. I mean, you shouldn't be
>> depending on anything but the interfaces documented in
>> Documentation/ABI/stable/, no?

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Who is the f*cking MORON that thinks that "documentation" has any meaning
> what-so-ever?

Me, I suppose. At least that's the impression I got when being asked
to document any new kmemtrace debugfs files, for example.

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> The fact that something is documented (whether correctly or not) has
> absolutely _zero_ impact on anything at all. What makes something an ABI
> is that it's useful and available. The only way something isn't an ABI is
> by _explicitly_ making sure that it's not available even by mistake in a
> stable form for binary use.

OK, but why do we have those different ABI "stages" in
Documentation/ABI then? The README file there seems to contradict what
you say. Or maybe I'm reading it wrong...

                         Pekka
--
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/