[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] delete devfs
    On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 12:47:53AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
    > Am Donnerstag, 22. Juli 2004 00:05 schrieb Greg KH:
    > > > That's the point that Oliver and I raised, the "leave it till 2.7" (not
    > > > breaking things for real world users) argument seems stronger than the
    > > > "rip it now" (because it makes things cleaner, easier to code, etc)
    > > > argument.
    > >
    > > The kernel development model (the whole stable/development tree thing)
    > > has changed based on the discussions at the kernel summit yesterday.
    > > See for more details. That is why I sent this patch at this
    > > point in time.
    > Interesting, but we are not talking about an _internal_ API here.
    > It's about blocking the upgrade path.

    There is no such block. udev has a full devfs compatibility mode, I made
    sure of that before every suggesting that a change like this happen.

    > System using a stable kernel will needlessly stop working after an
    > upgrade to another stable kernel.

    Userspace tools need to be upgraded/added due to different kernel
    changes all the time. This is just another one of them.

    Also, everyone please, consider these points about the current devfs
    - it is unmaintained, and has been for years.
    - it contains known bugs (race conditions), that are pretty much
    unsolvable with the current architecture of the code, that
    have been pointed out many times, for years.
    - there is almost no functionality that devfs provides that is
    not provided with udev[1]
    - no distro supports devfs
    - no active, respected, kernel developer wants to see devfs
    remain in the kernel tree.

    Yes, this has always seemed to be a hot topic. And yes, I did really
    push a lot of people's buttons by posting this patch[2], but I did it
    for two reasons:
    - It was going to be my first 2.7.0 patch anyway.
    - Based on the discussions at the kernel summit, the development
    model has changed. This patch was a test to see if anything
    has really changed or not :)

    I'm sorry about the fact that this change in development model was not
    really made public before I posted it. That probably caused the most
    confusion in this thread, and with hindsight, I should have waited a few
    days for that information to have gotten out to the whole world before
    submitting it[3].

    Again, I apologize.


    greg k-h

    [1] ok, yeah, the floppy driver will not get loaded automatically if you
    try to open a /dev node that is not present at that time. But if you
    still rely on this model of behavior to properly load your modules, you
    somehow missed the memo that stated that the kernel has changed from
    automatically loading modules based on userspace needs (with kmod), to
    one where they are loaded based on the presence of a device. This has
    all been discussed in detail many times in the past on lkml. See the
    udev FAQ for some other details about this.

    [2] It was said that I rubbed the lamp with this patch, causing Richard
    to suddenly appear in public at OLS within 8 hours. I personally doubt
    this, and publicly welcome Richard back to the kernel development

    [3] Note to self, sending patches at 2:30am after spending the evening
    in deep technical discussions[4] with other kernel developers is not the
    best thing to do.

    [4] Ok, they weren't that deep...
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.022 / U:15.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site