linux-kernel - Re: Revert needed: udev spewing warnons on common systems in 3.0

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:	Mon, 1 Aug 2011 18:32:07 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: Revert needed: udev spewing warnons on common systems in 3.0

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 17:52:06 -0700 Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

> 
> Hi Linus,
> 
> Can you please revert 
> 
> commit be8f684d73d8d916847e996bf69cef14352872c6
> Author: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> Date:   Mon Jul 25 17:12:18 2011 -0700
> 
>     oom: make deprecated use of oom_adj more verbose
> 
>     /proc/pid/oom_adj is deprecated and scheduled for removal in August 2012
>     according to Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt.
> 
> 
> This makes most of my test systems (suse 11.1, 11.2) spew scary WARN_ONs
> on every boot. GNOME then also complains.

aw, what crap.

"/proc/%d/oom_adj is deprecated, please use /proc/%d/oom_score_adj instead."

Once per boot.  That's not "scary".

> While it doesn't cause actual 
> misfunction it scares me every time I boot and other people who can't
> read git logs like me will be unnecessary scared.

What?  Look at the damn text - the only reason anyone would need to
read a git log after looking at that is terminal cretinism.

> Also the warning is completely useless: noone will be "fixing"
> udev on old distributions.

I bet there were still old copies of /sbin/update lying around, but we
still managed to remove sys_bdflush() this way.

> IMHO that's not acceptable to break common user land like this.
> Linux is supposed to be binary compatible and this patch is not
> in this spirit.
> 
> Actually removing the file later should be still fine, but 
> not printing out these scary messages.
> 
> I propose to revert this misguided patch for stable and 3.1
> 

I see lots of fake reasoning.  What's really going on here??
--
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/