From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Versioning scheme for rdma-plumbing
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 14:32:04 -0600
Message-ID: <20160914203204.GA14548@obsidianresearch.com>
References: <20160914044745.GB7975@obsidianresearch.com>
 <20160914122820.GA32048@infradead.org>
 <20160914173327.GJ16014@obsidianresearch.com>
 <20160914195335.GC8644@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160914195335.GC8644-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
To: Jarod Wilson <jarod-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>, Leon Romanovsky <leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Devesh Sharma <Devesh.sharma-laKkSmNT4hbQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Hal Rosenstock <hal-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org>, Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Moni Shoua <monis-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>, Sean Hefty <sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Steve Wise <swise-7bPotxP6k4+P2YhJcF5u+vpXobYPEAuW@public.gmane.org>, Tatyana Nikolova <Tatyana.E.Nikolova-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Vladimir Sokolovsky <vlad-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 03:53:35PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:

> It's actually useful. We tend to backport "up to kernel v4.x", so the
> kernelspace drivers would match up well enough with the libibverbs with a
> version number matching that. We actually have one userspace glue thing
> that Doug mentioned earlier, which uses exactly that scheme for it's
> versioning.

Humm to be clear, it would be more like '4.9 works with at least
kernel 4.9, but may not enable all features'. So you might still end
up using the 4.10 release to go with your backported 4.9 patches, for
example.

Perhaps that is the strongest argument not to use this versioning
scheme as it encourages artificial rushing to hit an arbitary version
number.. (as Greg KH complains about with the stable kernels)

Then again, perhaps we shouldn't be accepting the kernel side of
something if the user side isn't ready??

Unclear..

Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html