All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William D Waddington <william.waddington@beezmo.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFCLUE3] flagging kernel interface changes
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:14:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <455B9133.9030704@beezmo.com> (raw)

I tried submitting a patch a while back:
"[PATCH] IRQ: ease out-of-tree migration to new irq_handler prototype"
to add #define __PT_REGS to include/linux/interrupt.h to flag the change
to the new interrupt handler prototype.  It wasn't well received :(

No big surprise.  The #define wasn't my idea and I hadn't submitted a
patch before.  I wanted to see how the patch procedure worked, and
hoped that the flag would be included so I could mod my drivers and
move on...

What I'm curious about is why flagging kernel/driver interface changes
is considered a bad idea.  From my point of view as a low-life out-of-
tree driver maintainer,

#ifdef NEW_INTERFACE
#define <my new internals>
#endif

(w/maybe an #else...)

is cleaner and safer than trying to track specific kernel versions in
a multi-kernel-version driver.  It seems that in some cases, the new
interface has been, like HAVE_COMPAT_IOCTL for instance.

I don't want to start an argument about	"stable_api_nonsense" or the
wisdom of out-of-tree drivers.  Just curious about the - why - and
whether it is indifference or antagonism toward drivers outside the
fold. Or ???

Apologies for the long post, and thanks for your time.

Bill
-- 
--------------------------------------------
William D Waddington
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
william.waddington@beezmo.com
--------------------------------------------
"Even bugs...are unexpected signposts on
the long road of creativity..." - Ken Burtch

             reply	other threads:[~2006-11-15 22:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-15 22:14 William D Waddington [this message]
2006-11-15 22:25 ` [RFCLUE3] flagging kernel interface changes Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-15 22:37   ` William D Waddington
2006-11-16  1:05     ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2006-11-15 23:17 ` Jesper Juhl
2007-01-21 19:15   ` William D Waddington

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=455B9133.9030704@beezmo.com \
    --to=william.waddington@beezmo.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.