From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753906Ab2AaKsQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:48:16 -0500 Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:33963 "EHLO mail-ee0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753092Ab2AaKsP (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:48:15 -0500 Message-ID: <4F27C6EB.2070305@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:48:11 +0100 From: Jiri Slaby User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120124 Thunderbird/10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric W. Biederman" CC: Greg KH , Alan Cox , LKML , systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Linus Torvalds , Al Viro Subject: Re: sysfs regression: wrong link counts References: <4F27120A.4040106@suse.cz> <20120130220611.GA26655@kroah.com> <20120130221059.26ab5edf@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <20120130222717.GA6393@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/31/2012 02:27 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Greg KH writes: > >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:10:59PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: >>>> Isn't there some other "proper" way of doing this in userspace, or is >>>> this really the correct way? >>> >>> You can look at the S_IFMT bits and stuff however link count indicating >>> number of subdirectories is a standard Unix thing and used by many quite >>> mundane tools as an optimisation. >> >> Ah, yeah, that is easier. >> >> Eric, care to fix this or want me to revert it? > > With respect to sensors the conversation has already been had, and I fix > is already queued and should come out in the sensors release due out in > a week or so. So sensors should be fixed before this code is merged > into Linus's kernel. Oh, we are not going to break userspace with 3.3, are we? I understand that what sensors do is nothing but sh*t. But this change should wait until everybody has a chance to have fixed sensors package in their distribution. To be clear, what I'm suggesting is to postpone the change and schedule it for something like 3.7. > Now why something minor like sensors that nothing seems to depend > strongly on should stop a system from booting is a huge question. sensors do not prevent boot at all, of course. The other cannot-start-network bug does. > So I am going to have the conversation to triage what is up with > systemd. That seems totally unexpected. Looks like netdev renaming problem, see my other mail. thanks, -- js suse labs .