Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] xen-block: correctly define structuresin public headers

[One Thousand Gnomes]

> > If Konrad and Boris agree that breaking the kernel's ABI in this way is
> > acceptable in this specific case, I'll defer to them.
> 
> My opinion as Xen on ARM hypervisor maintainer is that this is the right
> thing to do in this case.

Sounds to me like the difference between "product" and "research toy".
You don't break back compatibility in a product when you can avoid it.
You may wish the publically humiliate those responsible (Linus seems to)
but at the end of the day it's done.

Your boolean choice is a false one anyway - you can do at least three
different things

- Implement and tell people to use the new API, break everyone's PoC and
  deployed systems, prevent old kernels running on newer Xen and
  generally make users lose confidence in it

- Keep the erroneous API and live with the uglies

- Keep the erroneous API working but implement a new clean API (and
  possibly make misuse produce a one per boot whine about fixing your
  kernel)

The Linux approach has tended to be the last one most of the time,
coupled with Linus having a rant 8)

Alan
--
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/