From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754161Ab2ALP7P (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:59:15 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.124]:39527 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753991Ab2ALP7N (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:59:13 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=A5HuztqG c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=hQRVNFTGe2sA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=ybGv7rb6yeJzYK2K_FoA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=j7xtlU9L0s6Sd7Xy:21 a=nAbpMD_5ZEvCGmJY:21 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1326383950.7642.86.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] Perf ABI (was: Re: [PATCH 09/11] sched: export task_prio to GPL modules) From: Steven Rostedt To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, "Ted Ts'o" , Peter Zijlstra , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:59:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1326383629.7642.85.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> References: <20111208232709.GA19820@kroah.com> <20111219104915.GA19861@elte.hu> <20111219153053.GA21548@Krystal> <20111220110813.GA19105@elte.hu> <20111223164629.GA30474@Krystal> <20111223172155.GA14117@thunk.org> <20111223181641.GA12681@Krystal> <20111225174613.GA12732@thunk.org> <20120112140905.GA30377@Krystal> <1326380042.7642.73.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20120112153957.GA20514@Krystal> <1326383629.7642.85.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 10:53 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > That's a stretch in calling version numbers. All but the madvise case > above are how many parameters it takes, not really a "version" number. > > It's adding a new syscall, not updating a version and then deprecating > the old one. As I believe all the above are still supported. > Actually, the madvise1() isn't supported. But this just shows that it has nothing to do with a version number. What version is madvise()? -- Steve