Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:26:05 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Cc: xiaoming.wang@intel.com, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        mgorman@suse.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: move the adding option Ngid to the end of
 proc/PID/status
Message-ID: <20150417142605.GA1954@htj.duckdns.org>
References: <CACVxJT_6O7bAMOQYDWfNgiVabPEot-o+bhO68wmdMT32cEsoww@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACVxJT_6O7bAMOQYDWfNgiVabPEot-o+bhO68wmdMT32cEsoww@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1161
Lines: 30

Hey,

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:23:48PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> It was demonstrated that Ngid addition as line 4 breaks apps,
> but your "what if" remains "what if".
> 
> I'd say Ngid should be moved to the end and every new field
> must be added to the end from now on, people can't parse
> simple file correctly, let's not create problems for them.

If this were in -rc or we are only a couple releases out, sure, moving
that to the end would be the right thing to do but that's not the case
and it bothers me that the patch essentially trades in about the same
magnitude of unknown risk.  No matter which way you spin it, unknown
risk of similar magnitude is not better than known risk and it's
pretty certain that we'll have all three variants out in the wild for
the foreseeable future.

If this has to happen, it should be moving Ngid right after TracerPid
not at the end of file.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/