From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87B44B70CB for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 18:53:09 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4CA83651.1010502@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 09:52:49 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections References: <4CA0EBEB.1030204@austin.ibm.com> <4CA1E338.6070201@redhat.com> <20100928151218.GJ14068@sgi.com> <20100929025035.GA13096@kroah.com> <4CA2F9A2.3090202@redhat.com> <20100929123752.GA18865@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20100929123752.GA18865@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, Robin Holt , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 09/29/2010 02:37 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >> > Thankfully things like rpm, hald, and other miscellaneous commands scan > >> > that information. > >> > >> Really? Why? Why would rpm care about this? hald is dead now so we > >> don't need to worry about that anymore, > > > > That's not what compatiblity means. We can't just support > > latest-and-greatest userspace on latest-and-greatest kernels. > > Oh, I know that, that's not what I was getting at at all here, sorry if > it came across that way. > > I wanted to know so we could go fix programs that are mucking around in > these files, as odds are, the shouldn't be doing that in the first > place. > > Like rpm, why would it matter what the memory in the system looks like? > I see, thanks. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.