Re: [PATCH RESEND 00/62] initrd: remove classic initrd support
Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.uml.devel,gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch,gmane.linux.ports.alpha,gmane.linux.kernel.arc,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.hexagon,gmane.linux.ports.mips,gmane.linux.ports.parisc,gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel,gmane.linux.ports.riscv,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.ports.sparc,gmane.linux.block,gmane.linux.kernel.initramfs,gmane.linux.kernel.api,gmane.linux.documentation,gmane.linux.kernel.efi,gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4,gmane.linux.acpi.devel,gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20250915-modebranche-marken-fc832a25e05d@brauner> |
On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 12:37:39AM +0000, Askar Safin wrote: > Intro > ==== > This patchset removes classic initrd (initial RAM disk) support, > which was deprecated in 2020. This is a good idea but the patchset does a bit too much and it's pretty convoluted and mixes cleanups with the removal of initrd support and so it's not that great to review let alone merge especially considering that a revert might be needed. Split it up into multiple patch series. Send a first series that focusses only on removing the generic infrastructure keeping it as contained as possible. Only do non-generic cleanups that are absolutely essential for the removal. Then the cleanups can go in separate series later. As usual I'm happy to try to shed old code but I wouldn't be too optimistic that we'll get away with this and if so it needs to be surgical.