linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] APM: delete APM in Linux-2.6.40

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: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1103260103250.28928@x980>
Date:	Sat, 26 Mar 2011 01:09:46 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] APM: delete APM in Linux-2.6.40

> > > Please don't turn Linux into second Windows.
> >
> > No worry there.
> >
> > I mention Microsoft not to advocate that Linux be Windows,
> > but to point out that this (hardware/firmware) ship sank 5 years
> > ago and Linux is still on the boat.  MS was able to delete
> > APM support in 2006 from their source tree, yet we still carry it.
> 
> And we also support ISA cards (network/sound/whatever). That's why many people 
> (including me) like and use Linux. Take any old machine that has enough power 
> to do the job you want and install Linux - e.g. get a Pentium box, install 
> Debian and you have a mail server (and if you need to power it down, you need 
> APM too). It's not possible with any other OS (well, maybe *BSD but Linux has 
> more drivers).
> 
> If we remove support for older HW, Linux will never get a decent desktop 
> market share. The common use case is "new Windows will not run (or run slow) 
> on that (old) box, let's try Linux".

Supporting APM is not a path to increased desktop market share.
Indeed, one could easily argue it would be the opposite.

> > > If you don't want APM in the
> > > kernel, just don't compile it. There are many people using older systems
> > > with APM - and most of them wouldn't oppose to this removal as they don't
> > > even know about it.
> >
> > They can still run old Linux on an old APM-only laptop --
> > just like they can still run Windows 3.1 or Windows XP if they want to.
> >
> > What we'd be taking away is their ability to run the latest
> > Linux kernel on that laptop.
> 
> And that's bad. With Linux philosophy, you need new kernel to get new HW 
> support. So if you have an APM-only laptop and would want to use a new USB 
> device, you're out of luck. What to do then? Delete Linux and install Windows 
> XP?
> 
> > The issue at hand is people (like me) who have to maintain
> > the latest Linux source code.  In sort, I don't want to
> > write, debug, and test a cpuidle driver for an apm-only laptop
> > when I could be spending effort on code that people will
> > actually run.
> 
> So don't do it then. If APM works now, keep it as is. Just like hgafb (HGA 
> hardware is from 1984).

Speaking for the only old system I have with APM support,
today's kernel already doesn't boot on it in APM mode.
(it boots fine in ACPI mode, though as you mentioned,
 X already dropped support for its decade-old graphics controller)

cheers,
-Len

--
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/