From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753175AbaIEWpP (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:45:15 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:19105 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751352AbaIEWpM (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:45:12 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="382153617" Message-ID: <540A3CF4.5070508@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 15:45:08 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo , Dmitry Torokhov CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Wu Zhangjin , Takashi Iwai , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Oleg Nesterov , hare@suse.com, Andrew Morton , Tetsuo Handa , Joseph Salisbury , Benjamin Poirier , Santosh Rastapur , Kay Sievers , One Thousand Gnomes , Tim Gardner , Pierre Fersing , Nagalakshmi Nandigama , Praveen Krishnamoorthy , Sreekanth Reddy , Abhijit Mahajan , Casey Leedom , Hariprasad S , MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@avagotech.com, Linux SCSI List , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/6] kthread: warn on kill signal if not OOM References: <1409899047-13045-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <20140905141241.GC10455@mtj.dyndns.org> <20140905164405.GA28964@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20140905174925.GA12991@mtj.dyndns.org> <20140905181003.GA29003@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20140905222956.GA15723@mtj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20140905222956.GA15723@mtj.dyndns.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 On 9/5/2014 3:29 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Dmitry. > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:10:03AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> I do not agree that it is actually user-visible change: generally speaking you >> do not really know if device is there or not. They come and go. Like I said, >> consider all permutations, with hot-pluggable buses, deferred probing, etc, > > It is for storage devices which always have guaranteed synchronous > probing on module load and well-defined probing order. Sure, modern > setups are a lot more dynamic but I'm quite certain that there are > setups in the wild which depend on storage driver loading being > synchronous. We can't simply declare one day that such behavior is > broken and break, most likely, their boots. we even depend on this in the mount-by-label cases many setups assume that the internal storage prevails over the USB stick in the case of conflicts. it's a security issue; you don't want the built in secure bootloader that has a kernel root argument by label/uuid. the security there tends to assume that built-in wins over USB