Re: linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
> And now you have a chutzpah to come and complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on fixing those? Al, Complaining about something that I can't fix, yep. But asking you to fix those, nop! That's not my intent. All I'm trying to say is there's too many out there who don't care about linux-next until the vanilla version came out and then everyone (may be just me) complained that it doesn't work anymore, So, would it be reasonable to allow the old-method to still function may be via CONFIG_OLD_PROCFS but warning that the old interface should not be used anymore. That's to allow "me" to continue to be able to work on the latest linux-3.10.0-rc1 while waiting for someone to fix those old modules. Reasonable? Thanks, Jeff On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:19:46AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote: >> Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on >> Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, >> diva/eicon and fio modules. >> >> Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more >> subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to >> handle the move rather than killing off the "tranditional" procfs >> access > > I might feel bad about those, if not for one thing - their authors > had explicitly chosen to keep them out of tree and did not bother > to watch what was going on in linux-next - these changes had been > there for quite a while. And now you have a chutzpah to come and > complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on > fixing those? Really? It's not a rethorical question - I seriously > want to know whether I'd misparsed what you meant to say. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:19:46AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote: > Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on > Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, > diva/eicon and fio modules. > > Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more > subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to > handle the move rather than killing off the "tranditional" procfs > access I might feel bad about those, if not for one thing - their authors had explicitly chosen to keep them out of tree and did not bother to watch what was going on in linux-next - these changes had been there for quite a while. And now you have a chutzpah to come and complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on fixing those? Really? It's not a rethorical question - I seriously want to know whether I'd misparsed what you meant to say. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, diva/eicon and fio modules. Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to handle the move rather than killing off the "tranditional" procfs access ... like a warning that the interface is going away soon? Thanks, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, diva/eicon and fio modules. Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to handle the move rather than killing off the tranditional procfs access ... like a warning that the interface is going away soon? Thanks, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:19:46AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote: Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, diva/eicon and fio modules. Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to handle the move rather than killing off the tranditional procfs access I might feel bad about those, if not for one thing - their authors had explicitly chosen to keep them out of tree and did not bother to watch what was going on in linux-next - these changes had been there for quite a while. And now you have a chutzpah to come and complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on fixing those? Really? It's not a rethorical question - I seriously want to know whether I'd misparsed what you meant to say. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: linux-3.10-rc1 procfs interface breaks vmware, eicon, fio .... any fix?
And now you have a chutzpah to come and complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on fixing those? Al, Complaining about something that I can't fix, yep. But asking you to fix those, nop! That's not my intent. All I'm trying to say is there's too many out there who don't care about linux-next until the vanilla version came out and then everyone (may be just me) complained that it doesn't work anymore, So, would it be reasonable to allow the old-method to still function may be via CONFIG_OLD_PROCFS but warning that the old interface should not be used anymore. That's to allow me to continue to be able to work on the latest linux-3.10.0-rc1 while waiting for someone to fix those old modules. Reasonable? Thanks, Jeff On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk wrote: On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:19:46AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote: Anyone on lkml working on patches for vmware to make it run on Linux-3.10-rc1? The recent change in procfs interface breaks vmware, diva/eicon and fio modules. Every modules is now broken and needs to be reworked. Is there a more subtle way to handle this like give more time to allow developers to handle the move rather than killing off the tranditional procfs access I might feel bad about those, if not for one thing - their authors had explicitly chosen to keep them out of tree and did not bother to watch what was going on in linux-next - these changes had been there for quite a while. And now you have a chutzpah to come and complain about that? Better yet, we are expected to be working on fixing those? Really? It's not a rethorical question - I seriously want to know whether I'd misparsed what you meant to say. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
