[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m164b6bxpz.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:03:36 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/59] Cleanup sysctl
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>>
>>> With "architectural" I mean "guaranteed to be stable" (as opposed to
>>> "incidental"). Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>> Ok. Then largely we are in agreement. To implement that the rule is simple.
>> If it isn't CTL_UNNUMBERED and the number is in Linus's tree, it is
>> our responsibility to never change the meaning of that number.
>>
>> If a new sysctl entry is introduced it should be CTL_UNNUMBERED until
>> it reaches Linus's tree to avoid conflicts.
>>
>> There is simply no point in having any kind of support for numbers
>> whose meanings can change.
>>
>> Which is why I removed the few cases of binary number duplication I
>> found.
>>
>
> Agreed. *Furthermore*, if the number isn't in <linux/sysctl.h> it shouldn't
> exist anywhere else, either.
That would be a good habit. Feel free to send the patches to ensure that
is so.
I'm a practical fix it when it is in my way kind of guy ;)
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists