From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1CE57F6F for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:18:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F918AC002 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id NMeGCgUFG1AGGY3b for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 17:18:32 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 10/11] quota: Add proper versioning support to fs_quota_stat Message-ID: <20130711071832.GC5652@dastard> References: <1372371914-11370-1-git-send-email-sekharan@us.ibm.com> <1372371914-11370-11-git-send-email-sekharan@us.ibm.com> <20130710155538.GY20932@sgi.com> <20130710162602.GB32444@quack.suse.cz> <1373489390.6020.30.camel@chandra-dt.ibm.com> <20130711014501.GY3438@dastard> <1373516161.4555.10.camel@chandra-laptop.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1373516161.4555.10.camel@chandra-laptop.ibm.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Chandra Seetharaman Cc: Ben Myers , Jan Kara , swhiteho@redhat.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:16:01PM -0500, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 11:45 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > And to play Devil's advocate: it is way too late in the merge cycle > > to make these sorts of ABI changes to a patch and test/review them > > adequately. > > There is no ABI issues even in the earlier version, it was an API > breakage. Old binaries would have done the wrong thing - that's an ABI issue. I'm sorry I didn't realise this earlier. > And with Jan's suggestion even that API breakage is being > fixed. There is no change in API or ABI. We are just adding a new > interface. Yes, we are adding a new API to avoid ABI problems with re-interpreting the old API. But whether it's API or ABI, it doesn't matter - my point is that it's almost 2 weeks after the merge window was opened and adding new userspace APIs at the last moment before the merge window closes tends to be frowned upon.... > Old code and old binary will work as before. Yes, but we have no new code or binaries to test the new interface, do we? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs