Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757117AbYFIUzS (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:55:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752671AbYFIUzC (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:55:02 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:34452 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752599AbYFIUzA (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:55:00 -0400 Message-ID: <484D9263.2040401@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:28:19 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Wright CC: Marcin Krol , jejb@kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" , Zwane Mwaikambo , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Justin Forbes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wedgwood , Domenico Andreoli , Nick Piggin , Randy Dunlap , Michael Krufky , Chuck Ebbert , Dave Jones , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Chuck Wolber , stable@kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [stable] [patch 21/50] brd: dont show ramdisks in /proc/partitions References: <20080607010215.358296706@sous-sol.org> <20080607010610.796754560@sous-sol.org> <484B02CF.6000606@kernel.org> <20080609170840.GG30402@sequoia.sous-sol.org> In-Reply-To: <20080609170840.GG30402@sequoia.sous-sol.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1161 Lines: 27 Chris Wright wrote: > * H. Peter Anvin (hpa@kernel.org) wrote: >> This seems a bit like cargo cult programming to me. If there isn't a >> known, good, reason to revert this behaviour change, I would consider it >> a bugfix, not a regression. > > We have one /proc/partitions parser that got broken (never saw details > on how). I don't care for this change either (esp. since nbd is still > left out...it's inconsistent). > > This is now the upstream behaviour (obvious since it's a -stable > candidate), and the change was introduced in 2.6.25...I'd actually prefer > to drop this patch, but there's no good reason to deviate if upstream > keeps this one. I can defer while upstream gets revisited, can you > revisit this upstream? I had to ask Chris offline what he meant with this... basically, he and I both agree that absent hard evidence of malfunction, we should revert to 2.6.25 behaviour. -hpa -- 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/