On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 14:16 +0200, Gabor Z. Papp wrote: > * Greg KH <[email protected]>: > > | > > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/fd0 > | > > > | > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > | > > WARNING: at drivers/block/floppy.c:1041 setup_rw_floppy+0x2f7/0x310 > [floppy]() > | > > Hardware name: System Product Name > | > > floppy_disable_hlt() scheduled for removal in 2012 > | > > | > Yes. I don't understand the point of that warning: > | > http://bugs.debian.org/667501 > | > > | > Ben and Greg, would > | > > | > f6365201d8a2 x86: Remove the ancient and deprecated disable_hlt() > | > and enable_hlt() facility > | > > | > be a candidate for inclusion in the 3.0.y and 3.2.y trees? > | > > | > An alternative would be to revert 3b70b2e5fcf6 ("x86 idle floppy: > | > deprecate disable_hlt()", 2011-04-01), which in principle seems a > | > little safer. > > | Gabor, does applying this patch fix this issue? > > Yes, using patch¹ fix this issue with 3.0.48 and 3.2.32. > > ¹http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=10;filename=x86-Remove-the-ancient-and-deprecated-disable_hlt-an.patch;att=1;bug=667501
I find this particular deprecation process deeply flawed. Since we had this hack for ages and it wasn't restricted to specific known-broken CPUs or chipsets, how can we be confident that no later 32-bit PCs depend on it? Why was the warning issued to floppy users *before* the change - with no option to test the new behaviour and quiet the warning - and not after? Many distribution users who skip several kernel versions will never see the warning at all. (Bonus bug: the warning was not dependent on CONFIG_X86_32.) Greg, which of these bad options do you think is preferable? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Reality is just a crutch for people who can't handle science fiction.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
