From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/6] kthread: warn on kill signal if not OOM Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2014 07:31:39 +0900 Message-ID: <20140905223139.GB15723@mtj.dyndns.org> 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Wu Zhangjin , Takashi Iwai , Arjan van de Ven , "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 To: Dmitry Torokhov Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140905222956.GA15723@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:29:56AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > 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. To add a bit, if the argument here is that dependency on such behavior shouldn't exist and module loading and device probing should always be asynchronous, the right approach is implementing "synchronous_probing" flag not the other way around. I actually wouldn't hate to see that change happening but whoever submits and routes such a change should be ready for a major shitstorm, I'm afraid. Thanks. -- tejun