Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762600AbXK2Meq (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:34:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755414AbXK2Meh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:34:37 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:45211 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754561AbXK2Meg (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:34:36 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:34:01 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Albert Cahalan Cc: Guillaume Chazarain , akpm@linux-foundation.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, oleg@tv-sign.ru, rjw@sisk.pl, roland@redhat.com, xemul@openvz.org, linux-kernel , Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: + proc-fix-the-threaded-proc-self.patch added to -mm tree Message-ID: <20071129123401.GA16609@elte.hu> References: <200711262339.lAQNdNrw029057@imap1.linux-foundation.org> <20071128014901.4b303954@inria.fr> <787b0d920711280141v463759efod86395c50c1b47c5@mail.gmail.com> <20071128104622.GB19694@elte.hu> <787b0d920711281014i76f182b7xaba100247e4ee79a@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <787b0d920711281014i76f182b7xaba100247e4ee79a@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1820 Lines: 37 * Albert Cahalan wrote: > > I am faced with incidents on an almost daily basis that show how > > much we kernel folks suck at defining new APIs. The only luck is > > that the set of system calls is fairly complete already - but in the > > rare case where we touch an API it's a catastrophy most of the time. > > With such an API track record we'd probably never survive as a > > user-space project. > > Most of user-space is worse. most of user-space is a 'leaf' node product, not infrastructure. The core infrastructure bits of userspace like glibc have a lot saner API practice than the kernel. (with a 10 times larger API exposure! There are 3000+ glibc APIs, contrast that with the few-hundred kernel APIs.) > What shocks me is that people keep designing ABIs with structs that > contain holes. (data leaks, waste, portability trouble, etc.) This > happens in kernel ABIs all the time. It ought to be blocked by some > sort of build tool. (with a whitelist for old stuff) what shocks me more is the wide gap between talk and deed ;-) Really, you had strong (and mostly unjust) words towards the containers stuff, with little constructive criticism - while what started out this discussion was your (in hindsight) shortsighted choice of mucking with /proc/self years ago. We all make mistakes but you seem to even be proud of it. If your goal is to bring Linux forward please become more constructive and cut out the insults towards others. (and you'll magically see less insults go in your general direction as well ;-) Ingo - 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/