Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

[Chris Weiss]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> James Bottomley, on 08/22/2010 12:43 AM wrote:
>> Interface re-use (or at least ABI compatibility) is the whole point,
>> it's what makes the solution a drop in replacement.
>
> I see now. You want ABI compatibility to keep the "contract" that no
> kernel changes can break applications binary compatibility for unlimited
> time.

ok now I'm confused, or maybe I'm not understanding ABI correctly, or
maybe you guys are using it in a way that is inconsistent with popular
convention.   As a VMware user, I have experienced fully that the
kernel ABI changes in various places with every release.  VMwares
drivers have to be constantly updated to match changes in kernel
function parameters and even what functions are available.

I've also experienced it with scsi cards, dsl modems, and other 3rd
party drivers.  It's the one big downside to developing for the Linux
kernel, the ABI is /always/ changing.
--
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/