[RFCLUE3] flagging kernel interface changes

[William D Waddington]

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@xxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------
"Even bugs...are unexpected signposts on
the long road of creativity..." - Ken Burtch
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/