From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261665AbTDHRHp (for ); Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:07:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261674AbTDHRHp (for ); Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:07:45 -0400 Received: from havoc.daloft.com ([64.213.145.173]:21223 "EHLO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261665AbTDHRHn (for ); Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:07:43 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:19:16 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: Jamie Lokier Cc: Alan Cox , Rusty Russell , zwane@linuxpower.ca, Linux Kernel Mailing List , hch@infradead.org Subject: Re: SET_MODULE_OWNER? Message-ID: <20030408171916.GA11773@gtf.org> References: <20030408035210.02D142C06E@lists.samba.org> <1049802672.8120.14.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20030408144644.GB30142@mail.jlokier.co.uk> <20030408151226.GA30285@gtf.org> <20030408164501.GA30428@mail.jlokier.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030408164501.GA30428@mail.jlokier.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 05:45:01PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > It is all very well to insist that SET_MODULE_OWNER() remains so you > can take 2.4 drivers and easily compile them for 2.2... but why is > that the benchmark? I can't take 2.4 drivers and do that, because I > want to support 2.0 as well, so I bite the bullet and make the > necessary changes for broader compatibility. You can do 2.0 compat with kcompat. Just needs a couple more compat macros in kcompat tarball. I grant you that net drivers are much more resilient across kernel versions, and are easier to make portable across the various kernel API changes -- precisely because we've managed to keep the core interfaces fairly stable, logic- and locking-wise. SET_MODULE_OWNER is just one more piece of this conscious effort. > So.. back to a point. Is 2.2 compilability (with the help of kcompat) > one of the goals to aim for in 2.5 drivers generally? Or is this > specifically meant for the network drivers which you support? In general, the mainline kernel has two conflicting goals: * maintain source back-compat as long as it is reasonable * keep back-compat garbage to a minimum, eliminating it where possible It really comes down to a maintainer decision, unless there is an overriding decision to purposefully break source back-compat. To answer your question specifically, SET_MODULE_OWNER eases source back-compat in general, but it's main user is network drivers. Jeff