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
next 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox