linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

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: <20160114011720.GT4894@vapier.lan>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 20:17:20 -0500
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de, keith.busch@...el.com,
	axboe@...com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the uapi
> > version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but the uapi list
> > still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install the headers hit a
> > failure as the header no longer exists.
> 
> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the
> filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can do so?

i have no opinion on either route

on a related note, shouldn't headers install be part of the automatic
kernel checks that are run against repos on kernel.org ?  who runs that
thing ?
-mike

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)