On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 14:01:55 -0700 Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> > wrote: > >> > IOW, the no-fallback behavior is easy to implement, easy to >> > understand, and has extremely predictable behavior. The fallback >> > behavior is more user friendly if you consider having a chance of >> > booting to something useful if you typo your init= option (but also a >> > chance of booting to something actively undesirable). >> >> Here's an alternative proposal: how about we change the default >> *without* a Kconfig option, see if anyone screams, and if they do, we >> add that code back in under a Kconfig option as in your current patch? >> >> Would that make your Kconfig senses stop tingling, Andrew? :) > > Mumble. I suppose we can run with it as-is: at least the config option > is there to allow people to repair any damage easily. > > However we don't have any way of remembering to remove the config > option later coz someone removed feature-removal-schedule.txt, which > was a useful feature.
Does -mm have a next+1 section? If so, you could queue it up now :) --Andy -- 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/
