linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Driver Core: devtmpfs - kernel-maintained tmpfs-based /dev

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:	Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:18:16 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>, gregkh@...e.de,
	Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>,
	Scott James Remnant <scott@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Driver Core: devtmpfs - kernel-maintained tmpfs-based /dev

Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 06:48:26AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> > Linux used to be lean and mean which made it fun to work with, and which
> > made the switch from the competition easy.  Nowadays I see a lot of bloat
> > going into the kernel which may indicate that Linux is starting to run
> > out of steam.
>
> That doesn't seem to make sense, if more development is happening, and
> our number of contributors, different companies, and rate of change is
> increasing, how are we "running out of steam"?

Running out of "quality steam".  Quantity can never replace Quality.

> What specific development number is proof of us slowing down?  I see
> nothing but the exact, and extreme, opposite thing happening.

The increasing number of regressions are probably cause for concern.

> > devtmpfs seems bloaty due to the hotplug dependency.
>
> Would you use it if we fix it to remove this dependancy?

Yes, if it also compares to static /dev in terms of speed.

> So what really is your objection here?  That we did not let devtmpfs
> work within a CONFIG_HOTPLUG=n type system? 

Yes.

> Or that devtmpfs works with
> the existing CONFIG_HOTPLUG=y systems (i.e. 99% of the world)?

And that should stay an option.


Thanks!

--
Al

--
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/