From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758921Ab1LOPWx (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:22:53 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:40020 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751578Ab1LOPWw (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:22:52 -0500 Message-ID: <4EEA10BC.3000906@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:22:36 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rbenyehuda@manz.com CC: "wad@chromium.org" , "kay.sievers@vrfy.org" , Rasty Slutsker , Lior Brafman , raziebe@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Subject:[PATCH 1:1] boot paramer "root=" gets a list of devices References: <1323940396.16032.2.camel@raz> <4EEA0C05.4030907@zytor.com> <1323962398.11872.3.camel@raz> In-Reply-To: <1323962398.11872.3.camel@raz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/15/2011 07:19 AM, Raz Ben Yehuda wrote: >> >> To which point I have to ask, once again, at which point we stop putting >> this stuff in the kernel to "bypass the need for initramfs"... > because there are times where we cannot use initramfs. is this a problem > with way i phrase or with with the whole idea ? > There are problems with the whole concept of "cannot use initramfs". We allow the initramfs to be integrated with the kernel image for a reason, for example. I'm obviously ranting on this in part to make people think about what they are doing, and partly to remind that the more complex the in-kernel root-mounting code get, the more it might be worth reconsidering klibc in the kernel build tree. -hpa