Re: [PATCH 1/2] build: add backward compatibility for nested drivers

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

23/09/2025 15:28, Bruce Richardson:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 02:08:35PM +0100, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> > Yes, that is a good point for discussion. Seen as support for the legacy
> > names were already dropped and I wasn't aware of any ABI like policy
> > about it, I thought there may be a preference for deprecation
> > warning/continuing to move to the new name only.
> > 
> > I would be happy to keep the legacy name without a warning/deprecation
> > for a longer term and we could adopt this as general guideline by
> > default too. It should not cost much effort to do this.
> 
> Agreed. If we do decide after a while to remove an old name, then we should
> do a deprecation notice first.

I don't think we should require a notice if there is no deprecation,
just an alias added.

> > Another minor point is, if this needs a Fixes tag? Yes, in the sense it
> > feels like it added a banana skin for users (the patches are because I
> > hit this issue with 25.07). I didn't add it for now, as no guarantees
> > were broken and there isn't an upstream stable for backporting to anyway.
> 
> If there is no backporting, I'm not sure it matters. Maybe add one anyway
> to imply that this was something that should have been thought of in the
> original patch.

Backports are not only for upstream branches.
If someone wants to maintain 25.07 privately,
it is good to know what to backport.