Re: [PATCH][2.5.74] devfs lookup deadlock/stack corruption combined patch

[Herbert Poetzl]

On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 06:26:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 09:49:17PM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> > > 
> > > I do not want to sound like it has to be ignored - 
> > > but devfs code is so messy that no trivial fix exists 
> > > that would not make code even more messy.
> > 
> > sorry to interrupt, but wasn't there an ongoing
> > efford to replace the devfs with smalldevfs or 
> > something even better? *hint*
> > 
> 
> Yes, but
> 
> a) It didn't have a compatible solution for the legacy device 
>    names (/dev/hda, etc).  Could have been fixed up in userspace 
>    but the work was not done.

I might be totally wrong, as I can only speak
for 2.4 (which has no ongoing/forgotten smalldevfs 
efford ;), but devfs has definitely divided the
users into two groups (think religion/war) ...

the group using devfs, usually doesn't care about
the 'compatibility' issue, the other doesn't care
at all ... so this isn't an issue at all ...

> b) Certain parties youknowwhoyouare seem to have been stricken 
>    by smalldevfs amnesia.

maybe this helps youknowwhoyoumean to remember ...

> I'm hoping that smalldevfs comes back.  
> The current thing is a running sore.

I'm hoping too, and I would like to see it on
2.6 as well as 2.4 ...

using 2.4 I'm currently bound to devfs, as I'm
one of the pro-devfs guys, and I think Richard
Gooch did a great work with it ... (maybe a 
little too much work actually ;)

best,
Herbert

> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [e-mail]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/