From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933290Ab3CTQlR (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:41:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ia0-f180.google.com ([209.85.210.180]:34621 "EHLO mail-ia0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752066Ab3CTQlQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:41:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1363791074-16415-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca> <1363791074-16415-3-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca> <5149D38E.9030202@gmail.com> From: Grant Likely Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:40:55 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: wiumKRcCCPC2DNh_X-HMVsf42HM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: remove /proc/device-tree To: Daniel Mack Cc: Rob Herring , Greg Kroah-Hartman , devicetree-discuss , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Rob Herring , "David S. Miller" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Daniel Mack wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >> On 03/20/2013 09:51 AM, Grant Likely wrote: >>> The same data is now available in sysfs, so we can remove the code >>> that exports it in /proc and replace it with a symlink to the sysfs >>> version. >>> >>> Tested on versatile qemu model and mpc5200 eval board. More testing >>> would be appreciated. >> >> I would suggest testing with lshw in particular. That's the only >> /proc/device-tree user I've come across. > > kexec is another one. Not to mention various vendor scripts that aren't > necessarily public. > > Don't such things also fall under the "we do not break userspace > compatibility - ever" rule? Correct. I've got no intention of applying this without testing the major users first. g.