Re: linux-next: Tree for July 30
flat view
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Date: 2008-07-31 19:24:26
Also in:
linux-next, lkml
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:10:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:quoted
quoted
Well, we're not supposed to break user space that we used to work with, even if it is known to be buggy.No, I am sorry. We are not supposed to break userspace ABI, but that is it. Can you vouch that 2.6.25 did not break a single userspace program out there?Dmitry - irrelevant. If we know of breakage, then that is a FACT, and it's a regression, and it needs to be fixed.
Does it have to be papered over in the kernel though?
Trying to say "there might be _other_ breakage that we don't even know of" does not change the situation ONE LITTLE BIT! Don't you see how stupid that approach is? You're basically trying to make excuses for known breakage by saying that there might be _other_ breakage that we don't know about? Why the _hell_ do you think that is an excuse at all?
We can only guarantee one thing - ABI. And that is kept intact. But I literally have no idea if a kernel breaks a random program out there that happens to have a bug.
quoted
quoted
Many people use the older user space on their test systems which are not practical to upgrade.I don't understand this - it is expected that everyone jumps and upgrades their kernels with ease but updating broken userspace bits is super-hard...You're missing the point. People are supposed to be able to upgrade things _independently_. It's not about "you're supposed to be able to upgrade the kernel, but not upgrade user space". It's about "you shouldn't evemn have to _worry_ about it.quoted
quoted
IOW, if the change responsible for this makes it to the mainline kernel, it will be considered as a regression.Like I said, I don't agree.Sorry, but you're simply wrong. If somebody has the commit that broke user space, that commit will be _reverted_ unless it's fixed. It's that simple. The rules are: we don't knowingly break user space.
We have 3 options now: 1. Never change KEY_MAX and dont add any new key definitions. 2. Introduce a new ioctl and have all wel-behaving programs rewritten to support it. 3. Fix userspace driver (patch is available). Gioventhe fact that I wanted that change to go when .28 opens and it will really hit users in 6+ months I'd still like to have 3. -- Dmitry