[lkml]   [1999]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Kernel interface changes (was Re: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versions)

>> I take it this means that someone, in their infinite wisdom (Jens:
>> apologies if this was you), decided to gratuitously change yet another
>> kernel interface (and not mention it to the community beyond burying
>I doubt it. Check the files and let me know but I would guess #1 that
>glibc exports scsi/sg.h which should be compatible and maybe has a bug. I've
>not hit any sg problems other than the generic one buffer and no scatter
>gather stuff

OK, I'll look with the assumtion that nothing should have changed in mind.

As for SG problems, I can fill several pages with them, but that's a
different (well known) subject.
>> for no good reason. You might have *thought* that just bumping up the
>> size of the argument struct to a single ioctl from 2.0.34->2.0.35 was
>That would count as a bug. I can't find the report in my 2.0.34pre archive

I have the whole email exchange archived if necessary (you commented
on it at the time). It's water under the bridge now.

The worry is that kernel developers are not paying much attention to
these sorts of 'bugs'; they don't consider these changes to be a
problem. I'm glad that my main immediate concern was possibly
unfounded, but the content of the flame still stands.

>> and its lookup tables for example). A binary built against 5.3
>> segfaults when run with 5.4 and vice versa. So, everything is
>> statically linked. Thank you Foresight.
>There are reasons people like Red Hat didnt go to 5.4 8)

5.3 was riddled with bounds bugs that didn't get fixed until 5.4.
You'd segfault all the time sticking with 5.3... but you'd have to
rebuild everything to use 5.4. Upgrading mindlessly (it was, after all
a subminor release change that introduced the incompatability) would
make matters even worse. There was no reason to make those changes to
a minor release of libc. Again, the ideas behind the flame stand.

>The kernel SG api hasnt afaik changed. All my old binaries run, the glibc
>binaries I have run fine too (SANE for example).

This change would cause heisenbugs, not certain failure. The
2.0.34->2.0.35 ioctl struct size change I mention above only ever
produced segfaults for two of my users. Everyone else managed to keep
running, just happening not to page fault in the wrong place. It was
still a bug.

I'll report on the results of my hunting.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans