LinuxLists.cc - [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

2006-03-20 21:24:06

Subject: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

2006-03-20 21:30:28

by Randy Dunlap

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:23:38 -0800 Greg KH wrote:

> They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> (due to the lack of users.)
>
> It's also been over 8 months past the date when we said we would delete
> devfs from the kernel tree in the file,
> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and over one and one half
> years since we publicly announced to the world that devfs would be
> removed from the kernel tree. So, I think people have had plenty of
> advance notice that this was going to happen by now :)
>
> Please pull from:
> rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
> or if master.kernel.org hasn't synced up yet:
> master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
>
> I've posted all of these patches before, but if people really want to look at them, they can be found at:
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-05-devfs/
>
> Also, if people _really_ are in love with the idea of an in-kernel
> devfs, I have posted a patch that does this in about 300 lines of code,
> called ndevfs. It is available in the archives if anyone wants to use
> that instead (it is quite easy to maintain that patch outside of the
> kernel tree, due to it only needing 3 hooks into the main kernel tree.)
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
>
> Documentation/DocBook/kernel-api.tmpl | 5
> Documentation/filesystems/devfs/ChangeLog | 1977 ---------------
> Documentation/filesystems/devfs/README | 1959 ---------------
> Documentation/filesystems/devfs/ToDo | 40
> Documentation/filesystems/devfs/boot-options | 65

More Documentation/ references to /devfs/i :

Changes
computone.txt
feature-removal-schedule.txt
initrd.txt
ioctl-number.txt
kernel-docs.txt
kernel-parameters.txt
README.DAC960

---
~Randy

2006-03-20 21:34:49

by H. Peter Anvin

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

Followup to: <[email protected]>
By author: "Randy.Dunlap" <[email protected]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> ioctl-number.txt

Do not remove from ioctl-number.txt; those ioctl numbers should not be
reused.

-hpa

2006-03-20 21:38:00

by Randy Dunlap

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:34:07 -0800 (PST) H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Followup to: <[email protected]>
> By author: "Randy.Dunlap" <[email protected]>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> > ioctl-number.txt
>
> Do not remove from ioctl-number.txt; those ioctl numbers should not be
> reused.

Ack. I didn't mean that they should all be removed, but at
least reviewed/considered.

---
~Randy

2006-03-20 22:03:42

by Greg KH

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:32:30PM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> More Documentation/ references to /devfs/i :
>
> Changes
> computone.txt
> feature-removal-schedule.txt
> initrd.txt
> ioctl-number.txt
> kernel-docs.txt
> kernel-parameters.txt
> README.DAC960

Yes, some of the surrounding documentation might still need to be
cleaned up. I'll do that in a few days (after I push out my other
trees...)

thanks,

greg k-h

2006-03-20 23:58:56

by Olivier Galibert

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:23:38PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> (due to the lack of users.)

I'm an occasional user. I'm just able to add a config entry by hand.

Devfs for block devices is required for the fedora core 3 install
kernel. I haven't checked whether fc4 needs it too (DaveJ?), but if
it is the case it would be a real bad idea to remove it before fc6 is
out.

I know, I know, compatibility is for the weak.

OG.

2006-03-21 00:05:36

by Dave Jones

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 12:58:46AM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:23:38PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> > 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> > and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> > no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> > anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> > deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> > (due to the lack of users.)
>
> Devfs for block devices is required for the fedora core 3 install
> kernel. I haven't checked whether fc4 needs it too (DaveJ?)

Hell no. It's never been included in any Fedora release.
Make it dead already.

Dave

--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

2006-03-21 07:15:35

by Arjan van de Ven

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 00:58 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:23:38PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> > 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> > and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> > no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> > anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> > deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> > (due to the lack of users.)
>
> I'm an occasional user. I'm just able to add a config entry by hand.
>
> Devfs for block devices is required for the fedora core 3 install
> kernel.

that is not true; Fedora Core 3 does not even have devfs enabled, and
neither RHL nor FC has shipped devfsd like forever

FC3 uses udev

2006-03-21 12:48:01

by Olivier Galibert

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 08:15:22AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 00:58 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:23:38PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> > > 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> > > and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> > > no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> > > anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> > > deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> > > (due to the lack of users.)
> >
> > I'm an occasional user. I'm just able to add a config entry by hand.
> >
> > Devfs for block devices is required for the fedora core 3 install
> > kernel.
>
> that is not true; Fedora Core 3 does not even have devfs enabled, and
> neither RHL nor FC has shipped devfsd like forever
>
> FC3 uses udev

The _install_ kernel does not use udev. It uses a mix of static /dev
and whatever it is which creates the block devices, but after checking
is not devfs after all, sorry about the mistake.

OG.

2006-03-23 03:32:32

by Kalin KOZHUHAROV

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

Greg KH wrote:
> They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> (due to the lack of users.)
>
> It's also been over 8 months past the date when we said we would delete
> devfs from the kernel tree in the file,
> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and over one and one half
> years since we publicly announced to the world that devfs would be
> removed from the kernel tree. So, I think people have had plenty of
> advance notice that this was going to happen by now :)
>
> Please pull from:
> rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
> or if master.kernel.org hasn't synced up yet:
> master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
>
> I've posted all of these patches before, but if people really want to look at them, they can be found at:
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-05-devfs/
>
> Also, if people _really_ are in love with the idea of an in-kernel
> devfs, I have posted a patch that does this in about 300 lines of code,
> called ndevfs. It is available in the archives if anyone wants to use
> that instead (it is quite easy to maintain that patch outside of the
> kernel tree, due to it only needing 3 hooks into the main kernel tree.)

OK, I completely agree with that, but shouldn't there be left something in
the Documentation at least? A note like "devfs was superseded by udev since
2.6.?? and was completely removed since 2.6.??" or something along the same
line of thought? It will just make life easier for people finding lots of
old pages and HOWTOs on the Net mentioning devfs.

Unfortunately I couldn't find a proper place for that note...
Maybe a new file Documentation/filesystems/devfs.txt instead of the
Documentation/filesystems/devfs directory present now?

Kalin.

--
|[ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ]|
+-> http://ThinRope.net/ <-+
|[ ______________________ ]|

2006-03-23 21:29:47

by Adrian Bunk

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:33:13PM +0900, Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
> > 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
> > and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
> > no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
> > anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
> > deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
> > (due to the lack of users.)
> >
> > It's also been over 8 months past the date when we said we would delete
> > devfs from the kernel tree in the file,
> > Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and over one and one half
> > years since we publicly announced to the world that devfs would be
> > removed from the kernel tree. So, I think people have had plenty of
> > advance notice that this was going to happen by now :)
> >
> > Please pull from:
> > rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
> > or if master.kernel.org hasn't synced up yet:
> > master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
> >
> > I've posted all of these patches before, but if people really want to look at them, they can be found at:
> > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-05-devfs/
> >
> > Also, if people _really_ are in love with the idea of an in-kernel
> > devfs, I have posted a patch that does this in about 300 lines of code,
> > called ndevfs. It is available in the archives if anyone wants to use
> > that instead (it is quite easy to maintain that patch outside of the
> > kernel tree, due to it only needing 3 hooks into the main kernel tree.)
>
> OK, I completely agree with that, but shouldn't there be left something in
> the Documentation at least? A note like "devfs was superseded by udev since
> 2.6.?? and was completely removed since 2.6.??" or something along the same
> line of thought? It will just make life easier for people finding lots of
> old pages and HOWTOs on the Net mentioning devfs.
>
> Unfortunately I couldn't find a proper place for that note...
> Maybe a new file Documentation/filesystems/devfs.txt instead of the
> Documentation/filesystems/devfs directory present now?

There's already a note in Documentation/Changes.

> Kalin.

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

2006-03-28 23:10:44

by Bill Davidsen

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:33:13PM +0900, Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
>> Greg KH wrote:
>>> They are the same "delete devfs" patches that I submitted for 2.6.12 and
>>> 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 and 2.6.15. It rips out all of devfs from the kernel
>>> and ends up saving a lot of space. Since 2.6.13 came out, I have seen
>>> no complaints about the fact that devfs was not able to be enabled
>>> anymore, and in fact, a lot of different subsystems have already been
>>> deleting devfs support for a while now, with apparently no complaints
>>> (due to the lack of users.)
>>>
>>> It's also been over 8 months past the date when we said we would delete
>>> devfs from the kernel tree in the file,
>>> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and over one and one half
>>> years since we publicly announced to the world that devfs would be
>>> removed from the kernel tree. So, I think people have had plenty of
>>> advance notice that this was going to happen by now :)
>>>
>>> Please pull from:
>>> rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
>>> or if master.kernel.org hasn't synced up yet:
>>> master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/devfs-2.6.git/
>>>
>>> I've posted all of these patches before, but if people really want to look at them, they can be found at:
>>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-05-devfs/
>>>
>>> Also, if people _really_ are in love with the idea of an in-kernel
>>> devfs, I have posted a patch that does this in about 300 lines of code,
>>> called ndevfs. It is available in the archives if anyone wants to use
>>> that instead (it is quite easy to maintain that patch outside of the
>>> kernel tree, due to it only needing 3 hooks into the main kernel tree.)
>> OK, I completely agree with that, but shouldn't there be left something in
>> the Documentation at least? A note like "devfs was superseded by udev since
>> 2.6.?? and was completely removed since 2.6.??" or something along the same
>> line of thought? It will just make life easier for people finding lots of
>> old pages and HOWTOs on the Net mentioning devfs.
>>
>> Unfortunately I couldn't find a proper place for that note...
>> Maybe a new file Documentation/filesystems/devfs.txt instead of the
>> Documentation/filesystems/devfs directory present now?
>
> There's already a note in Documentation/Changes.

I really don't think that's the most likely place people would look. The
suggested few lines in a file with a dead-obvious name would undoubtedly
save people time, as they would look there first.

No complaint about getting rid of the feature, but there are lots of
mentions of devfs, putting in a definitive explanation wouldn't be out
of place.

--
-bill davidsen ([email protected])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me