linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: remove /proc/device-tree

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: <CACTFLAMXHA58bu_c0hRQuZ=nru63hLaixNXaiU-Xa60WD5d=ew@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:24:54 +0100
From:	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>
To:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: remove /proc/device-tree

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com> wrote:
> On 03/20/2013 09:51 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>> The same data is now available in sysfs, so we can remove the code
>> that exports it in /proc and replace it with a symlink to the sysfs
>> version.
>>
>> Tested on versatile qemu model and mpc5200 eval board. More testing
>> would be appreciated.
>
> I would suggest testing with lshw in particular. That's the only
> /proc/device-tree user I've come across.

kexec is another one. Not to mention various vendor scripts that aren't
necessarily public.

Don't such things also fall under the "we do not break userspace
compatibility - ever" rule?


Daniel
--
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/