From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
jseward@acm.org
Subject: Re: Linux 4.0-rc1 out..
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:40:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EC2B04.9070406@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424745296.10678.12.camel@gmail.com>
Am 24.02.2015 um 03:34 schrieb Mike Galbraith:
> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 16:43 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
>>> .. let's see how much, if anything, breaks due to the version number.
>>> Probably less than during the 3.0 timeframe, but I can just imagine
>>> somebody checking for meaningful versions.
>>>
>>> Because the people have spoken, and while most of it was complete
>>> gibberish, numbers don't lie. People preferred 4.0, and 4.0 it shall
>>> be. Unless somebody can come up with a good argument against it.
>>
>> The only argument that I can come up with is "we do not break userspace".
>> For example there is this "gem" in configure.ac of valgrind:
>>
>>
>> case "${kernel}" in
>> 2.6.*|3.*)
>> AC_MSG_RESULT([2.6.x/3.x family (${kernel})])
>> AC_DEFINE([KERNEL_2_6], 1, [Define to 1 if you're using Linux 2.6.x or Linux 3.x])
>> ;;
>>
>> 2.4.*)
>> AC_MSG_RESULT([2.4 family (${kernel})])
>> AC_DEFINE([KERNEL_2_4], 1, [Define to 1 if you're using Linux 2.4.x])
>> ;;
>>
>> *)
>> AC_MSG_RESULT([unsupported (${kernel})])
>> AC_MSG_ERROR([Valgrind works on kernels 2.4, 2.6])
>> ;;
>
>
> Heh, if this is an argument, we have one hell of a lot of reverting to
> do :) Crash for example breaks at much higher resolution, and indeed
> just broke yet again. Tough titty for userspace methinks.
Well crash is not a good example as it by design goes beyond the user ABI
and directly touches the kernel data structures ;-)
I am not requesting to go back to 3.*, I was just pointing out that if we apply
strict rules on "we dont break userspace", the move to 3.* and 4.* was a mistake.
We do provide uname26 as a workaround, so this is ok and the switch to 4 should
be a lot smoother.
But better end the discussion here :-)
Christian
FWIW, valgrind svn is fixed as of yesterday (for good, so Linux 5.* 6.*.. should
also work)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-24 7:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-23 3:06 Linux 4.0-rc1 out Linus Torvalds
2015-02-23 5:15 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-02-23 8:22 ` Sedat Dilek
2015-02-23 23:14 ` Olof Johansson
2015-02-24 19:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-23 8:15 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-02-23 12:56 ` Arend van Spriel
2015-02-23 14:19 ` Sven-Haegar Koch
2015-02-23 15:43 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-24 2:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-02-24 7:40 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2015-02-24 10:49 ` François Valenduc
2015-02-24 17:05 ` François Valenduc
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54EC2B04.9070406@de.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jseward@acm.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox