Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> writes: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 03:38:58PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Greg what is going on? I just looked and Tejuns ill-conceived recursive >> directory deletion code has been merged into your driver-core-next tree. >> >> That code is semantically broken. I reviewed it and I gave the reasons >> why it was wrong. You came up to me and mentioned at LPC that you >> agreed with my reasons. And yet I just looked in driver-core-next and >> there the code is in all of it's broken glory. > > Because I tested it out, and there were no such problems.
The biggest and worst issue is the semantics are total unmaintable garbage and there has never been a single counter argument to that. Recursive delete is WRONG. Further there was no follow up converstion on the list about this trash to say you had tested it. Or anything else. Even the partial recursive delete we currently have has been responsible for broken users of sysfs so I don't see how adding additional checks is going to do anything but paper over real bugs in real uses of sysfs. Will you please remove that garbage from your tree. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
