[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F81D5C4.9000503@openvz.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2012 22:15:32 +0400
From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: RFC: deprecating/removing the legacy mode of devpts
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Currently, devpts supports a legacy mode where only one instance exists.
> For backwards compatibility, this is also the default mode, but the
> right thing should be to migrate everyone over to the "newinstance" scheme.
>
> However, it is increasingly clear that that is not happening; neither
> the distros nor udev support this by default at this point.
>
> I think it might be time we set a sunset date for the legacy mode,
> probably around kernel 3.9 at this point.
>
> The big change is that /dev/ptmx instead of being a device node should
> be a symlink to /dev/pts/ptmx, which is then either chmodded to the
> proper permissions, or given proper permissions via the ptmxmode mount
> options to devpts. The latter is probably preferable from a technical
> point of view since it doesn't create a "gap".
>
> As such, I would like to suggest the following:
>
> 1. For 3.5, add this to feature-removal.txt.
> 2. For 3.6, remove CONFIG_DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES as a configuration
> option, and printk a warning if devpts is mounted without the
> "newinstance" option.
> 3. For 3.9 remove the legacy support including support for a ptmx node
> outside the devpts filesystem.
>
> -hpa
>
I think we should give the way to test compatibility as early as possible, so:
2'. For 3.6 add CONFIG_DEVPTS_LEGACY_INSTANCE =y by default, if it =n:
always create new instance (ignore "newinstance") and remove "ptmx" from sysfs.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists