From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: A generic kernel compatibilty code Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0800 Message-ID: <43e72e890911201307g2a1f280aie223ed4fd270aad@mail.gmail.com> References: <43e72e890911201245r4de5b039hb2dd5011dabf2399@mail.gmail.com> <1258750858.2877.58.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:51924 "EHLO mail-iw0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753794AbZKTVHu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:07:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1258750858.2877.58.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 12:45 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> Everyone and their mother reinvents the wheel when it comes to >> backporting kernel modules. It a painful job and it seems to me an >> alternative is possible. If we can write generic compatibilty code f= or >> a new routine introduced on the next kernel how about just merging i= t >> to the kernel under some generic compat module. This would be >> completey ignored by everyone using the stable kernel but can be >> copied by anyone doing backport work. >> >> So I'm thinking something as simple as a generic compat/comat.ko wit= h >> compat-2.6.32.[ch] files. >> >> We've already backported everything needed for wireless drivers unde= r >> compat-wireless under this format down to even 2.6.25. > [...] > > If you think 2.6.25 is old then I don't think you understand the scal= e > of the problem. > > OEMs still expect us to support RHEL 4 (2.6.9) and SLES 9 (2.6.5) tho= ugh > the latter will probably be dropped soon. =C2=A0Some other vendors ap= parently > still need to support even 2.4 kernels! Heh understood. Well shouldn't this help with that then? Sure I'd love to see the Enteprise Linux releases on 2.6.31 but that's not going to happen right? Shouldn't this help then? Luis