linux-kernel - Re: [patch] delayacct: fix iotop on x86

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, 14 Dec 2010 11:16:20 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Brian Rogers <brian@...w.org>, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...il.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch] delayacct: fix iotop on x86_64

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 01:32:39PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> I would rather abstract this better and I'd be apprehensive about the
> fix if iotop was at fault to begin with, I would rather fix iotop.
> IOW, are we fixing what iotop got wrong? Isn't it easier to backport
> the correct behaviour in iotop. I understand we broke the ABI, but
> user space can still live.
> 

The iotop people are definitely at fault and we should throw salmon at
the developers next time when we see them at a conference.  But in the
end, it's not really a matter of assigning blame to things.  It's just
annoying for users if the program stops working and you have to google
to figure out why the new kernel it broke iotop.

It's simple enough to paper over the bug for now, then fix it properly
in a couple years when everyone has upgraded their user space.

regards,
dan carpenter

--
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/