Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1999-41,: Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq

# Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq

Guest section DW (dwguest@win.tue.nl)
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:53:03 +0200 (MET DST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: 2.3.21 "/dev/dsp: Cannot allocate memory" [WORKAROUND]"
- Previous message: Raju K V: "undefined symbols during insmod"
- Maybe in reply to: Ed Grimm: "[PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"
- Next in thread: Peter Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"
- Reply: Peter Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"

From: David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>

> > +Safe Magic System Request Key support
> > +CONFIG_SAFE_MAGIC_SYSRQ
> > + If you say Y here, alt-SysRq-l will behave the same as alt-SysRq-i,
>
> Such things lead to a proliferation of CONFIG options.
> SYSRQ is already a very unimportant auxiliary option -
> I don't think it is a good idea to start offering this option
> in various subversions.

I've made a patch that makes all of the individual options for SysRQ into
sysctl's. However Alan somehow didn't like it, so it never got into the
kernel. I never got an explanation.

Yes, a well-known complaint. In this case I agree with Alan.
Of course I have no idea of Alan's reasoning, but mine would say:
(i) SysRq is a wart that some people like, so it exists, but it is certainly
not an official part of the Linux API. Such a wart must be very localized
in the source code. It must not grow and develop sub-warts or cause
changes elsewhere in the code.
(ii) The reason SysRq exists is that people want to use the keyboard in some
emergency cases, when something went very wrong. It is a human interface,
not a software interface.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: 2.3.21 "/dev/dsp: Cannot allocate memory" [WORKAROUND]"
- Previous message: Raju K V: "undefined symbols during insmod"
- Maybe in reply to: Ed Grimm: "[PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"
- Next in thread: Peter Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"
- Reply: Peter Benie: "Re: [PATCH] Slightly safer Magic SysRq"