Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S265247AbSKNVEl>; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:04:41 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S265246AbSKNVEl>; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:04:41 -0500
Received: from to-velocet.redhat.com ([216.138.202.10]:22511 "EHLO
	touchme.toronto.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S265243AbSKNVEj>; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:04:39 -0500
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:11:34 -0500
From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
       linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove hugetlb syscalls
Message-ID: <20021114161134.E20258@redhat.com>
References: <20021113184555.B10889@redhat.com> <20021114203035.GF22031@holomorphy.com> <20021114154809.D20258@redhat.com> <20021114210220.GM23425@holomorphy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <20021114210220.GM23425@holomorphy.com>; from wli@holomorphy.com on Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:02:20PM -0800
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1792
Lines: 38

Oracle does not run as root, so they can't even use the syscalls 
directly.  At least with hugetlbfs we can chmod the filesystem to be 
owned by the oracle user.

		-ben

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:02:20PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:30:35PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> The main reason I haven't considered doing this is because they already
> >> got in and there appears to be a user (Oracle/IA64).
> 
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 03:48:09PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > Not in shipping code.  Certainly no vendor kernels that I am aware of 
> > have shipped these syscalls yet either, as nearly all of the developers 
> > find them revolting.  Not to mention that the code cleanups and bugfixes 
> > are still ongoing.
> 
> This is a bit out of my hands; the support decision came from elsewhere.
> I have to service my users first, and after that, I don't generally want
> to stand in the way of others. In general it's good to have minimalistic
> interfaces, but I'm not a party to the concerns regarding the syscalls.
> My direct involvement there has been either of a kernel janitor nature,
> helping to adapt it to Linux kernel idioms, or reusing code for hugetlbfs.
> 
> I guess the only real statement left to make is that hugetlbfs (or my
> participation/implementation of it) was not originally intended to
> compete with the syscalls, though there's a lot of obvious overlap
> (which I tried to exploit by means of code reuse).
> 
> Bill

-- 
"Do you seek knowledge in time travel?"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/