On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:46:46 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[email protected]> wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >>> Reverting is safe since it simply re-establishes the 2.6.21 status quo.
> >>>
> >> Well, not really. It breaks any non-GPL module when CONFIG_PARAVIRT is
> >> enabled, even though the same module would work fine otherwise. That's
> >> a pretty large regression.
> >> ...
> >>
> >
> > The 2.6.21 status quo can by definition not be a regression compared
> > to 2.6.21.
> >
>
> 2.6.21's behaviour was a bug. CONFIG_PARAVIRT is not supposed to cause
> any behavioural changes.
2.6.22's behaviour is the bug. 2.6.21 you couldn't load random binary
crap into the kernel without logging a taint. 2.6.22 you can. This means
every single 2.6.22 bug report has to be assumed to be caused by binary
module crap as a starting point which slows down debug immensely.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
