From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"Michael Kerrisk \(man-pages\)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] uapi: get rid of STATX_ALL
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 18:11:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87va5zw7yp.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxiFrtphwYhDMpsiENV8zkHHKmthb7cB2T0PKU5BA_YTWw@mail.gmail.com> (Amir Goldstein's message of "Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:51:54 +0300")
* Amir Goldstein:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:11 PM Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Constants of the *_ALL type can be actively harmful due to the fact that
>> developers will usually fail to consider the possible effects of future
>> changes to the definition.
>>
>> Remove STATX_ALL from the uapi, while no damage has been done yet.
>>
>
> Look. When Linus says "let's see if somebody notices" and referring to ABI
> it means sooner or later someone will upgrade to newer kernel and complain
> if something breaks.
>
> But what does it mean with UAPI change? How often do people
> re-build existing programs? I, for one, build master for my
> testing, but never install uapi headers from master. I just can't
> wrap my head around the backward compatibiltiy nightmare a change
> like this could create.
So it appears that people use #ifdef STATX_ALL to check for struct
statx availability. So the backwards compatibility impact is that you
silently lose features in a consistent manner, which is very hard to
spot. 8-(
Probably not a good idea, then.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-18 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-18 13:11 [PATCH 1/3] orangefs: fix request_mask misuse Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-18 13:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] uapi: get rid of STATX_ALL Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-18 13:15 ` Florian Weimer
2018-10-18 14:32 ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-18 14:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-19 1:45 ` Andreas Dilger
2018-10-18 14:51 ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-18 16:11 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2018-10-18 15:16 ` David Howells
2018-10-19 2:25 ` Andreas Dilger
2018-10-18 13:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] statx: add STATX_ATTRIBUTES flag Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-18 15:22 ` David Howells
2018-10-19 1:48 ` Andreas Dilger
2018-10-18 21:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] orangefs: fix request_mask misuse martin
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=87va5zw7yp.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de \
--to=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
/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