In other words, we didn't catch that one in time. Oh well. Dave Young <dyoung at redhat.com> wrote: >On 11/17/13 at 07:29pm, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 11/17/2013 06:22 PM, Dave Young wrote: >> > On 11/13/13 at 08:50am, Dave Young wrote: >> >> On 11/12/13 at 06:51pm, Greg KH wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 01:37:25AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >>>> On 11/12/2013 12:30 AM, Greg KH wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> And these binary data blobs are a "standard" somewhere, and >will not >> >>>>> change per kernel version change? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> If so, that structure is fine with me. >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Correct. The structure is documented in >Documentation/x86/boot.txt, and >> >>>> has been largely invariant (but extended) since the beginning of >Linux. >> >>>> It has sometimes taken some serious work to keep it that way. >> >>> >> >>> Ok, then use the binary sysfs file interface for these blobs, and >> >>> everyone will be happy. >> >> >> >> Since we got an agreement I will move them to sysfs in next >version. >> > >> > I have created one patch for the sysfs part this weekend, bug I'm >hesitating to >> > remove the debugfs part because currently there's already user, I >tend to >> > keep them in debugfs for now. >> > >> > What do you think, Peter? >> > >> >> Yes, it makes sense to keep them for compatibility, at least for now. >> What is the specific user that already exists? > >kexec-tools is using it to setup hardware_subarch.. > >-- >Thanks >Dave -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
