From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9] helo=mail.free-electrons.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WCmDO-0002tJ-R7 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:27:43 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 05:27:15 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia To: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ubi: Introduce block devices for UBI volumes Message-ID: <20140210082714.GB10872@localhost> References: <52F6B602.3030905@nod.at> <20140208230159.GC22376@1wt.eu> <52F6BA07.60707@nod.at> <20140208231501.GG22376@1wt.eu> <52F6BCCD.5070302@nod.at> <20140208233758.GH22376@1wt.eu> <52F6C916.2030506@nod.at> <20140209075157.GJ22376@1wt.eu> <20140210024827.GB9643@localhost> <1392017750.31031.8.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1392017750.31031.8.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Mike Frysinger , Richard Weinberger , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Michael Opdenacker , Piergiorgio Beruto , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , Willy Tarreau List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 09:35:50AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Sun, 2014-02-09 at 23:48 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 08:51:57AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > [..] > > > > > > > > This I think it's a bad idea to artificially remove some features > > > > > if they're not broken. > > > > > > > > Your arguments have convinced me, let's keep it and hope the best. > > > > > > > Let me add that keeping the write support follows the whole "mechanism, > > not policy" kernel motto, doesn't it? > > > > Regarding users, well the option looks like this: > > > > [ ] Enable write support (DANGEROUS) > > > > I think any user would think twice before enabling it. > > Linus and Andrew usually ask reasonable questions like these for new > features. I'd like to ask them for the write feature. > > Who are the customers for these? > How are the user of the write feature? How many? I'm not aware of any. So far all the users that I'm aware of will be using this to mount a squashfs. > Have it been tested? If yes, how? > To be honest, not much. > These are really the things which define whether the feature should be > in or not, I think. > > If write support has 0 or 1.5 customers and it was not tested > extensively, and never used in any kind of production, I am not sure it > is needed to be there. But let's first hear your answers. > No, this hasn't been tested intensively and I'm pretty sure nobody would ever put it in production before conducting such tests himself. > It is simple is not good argument. It will be as simple to add it too. > OK. > WRT to DANGEROUS sign, people do not read Kconfig help. Some distro will > just enable this, people will start using this, and then start sending > unappy e-mails. We have this with MTD block. No matter how many times I > wrote to people that this is just a debugging module, they still kept > using it. > If you really think distros will enable it and users will "just it", without thinking about the consequences, then I'd say let's just remove it. -- Ezequiel García, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com