Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 20:16:54 +0200
From: Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>,
       J?rn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Console: fall back to /dev/null when no console is availlable
Message-ID: <20041006181654.GB4523@pclin040.win.tue.nl>
References: <20041005185214.GA3691@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20041005212712.I6910@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20041005210659.GA5276@kroah.com> <20041005221333.L6910@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1097074822.29251.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20041006174108.GA26797@kroah.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20041006174108.GA26797@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 794
Lines: 19

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 10:41:08AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:

> Good point.  So, should we do it in the kernel, in call_usermodehelper,
> so that all users of this function get it correct, or should I do it in
> userspace, in the /sbin/hotplug program?

The doctrine of defensive programming will teach you to write
/sbin/hotplug so that it can cope with such things.

(But I do not object at all to also doing it in the kernel.
Some would call it "papering over user space bugs", but one might
as well call it "making the system more robust".)

Andries
-
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/