[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4D2D856B-AE62-49D6-9ABE-5238E8B23A6C@mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 23:15:07 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
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>
Subject: Re: RFC: deprecating/removing the legacy mode of devpts
On Apr 8, 2012, at 6:45 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/08/2012 03:46 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> What if it turns out we can make udev/devtmpfs make this happen
>>> transparently (which it sounds like it might be possible)? Would you be
>>> okay with removing the "implicit bind mount" property of the current
>>> devpts then?
>>
>> Once we get to the point where it "just works" I'm quite happy for that
>> to happen unless it turns out there's any large code size/performance
>> hits in having the feature always on. I don't see any.
>>
>
> No, it's actually the other way around... it lets us take some pretty
> nice shortcuts.
If it requires making changes to udev, can we place make sure have
a decent amount of time before we remove code from the kernel?
I really hate it when people break userspace for the convenience
of kernel programmers. As I recall Linus had something to say
about that….
-- Ted
--
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