On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 22:22, Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On a narrow issue: do you really object to moving the "mount dev -t > devfs2 /dev" into userspace (and therefore giving it a user-visible > name)?? That would address Cristophs particular objection about > "messing around" with the initial namespace. An argument which does not stand at all, there is no mess, it is not mounted at all until we are ready with initializing the kernel. And instead of creating some random nodes in /dev like we do today, we mount it, and it contains a node for every device. I hardly see any of the mentioned "namespace mess" here, it's just the simplest, most robust, and most efficient thing we can do. :) > It means I can be 100% > sure I can boot an old initramfs with this option enabled. Oh, it does not change anything for an existing initramfs, if that option enabled. After initramfs found and mounted the real rootfs at /root, your are totally free to call: mount --move /dev/ /root/dev or not to do that, like we do today. > And it > gives a nice clean way for new initramfs' to test for this feature - > when they try to mount it, it fails. It would seem to make for a > rather smoother migration path. I think that is all covered just fine. One thing that I tried to solve by doing a kernel mounted fs, is that /dev on the rootfs is completely empty, it is that way on some distros today, and if you do init=/bin/sh, it will not work, because /dev/console is missing. Another thing, why I would like to avoid a new fstype is that userspace checks if /dev is a tmpfs to find out if it's a dynamic /dev - nothing really that should prevent us from doing a new filesystem, but we should need a good reason to do it, I think. Thanks, Kay -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
