Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:19:16 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: SET_MODULE_OWNER? |
| |
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 05:45:01PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > It is all very well to insist that SET_MODULE_OWNER() remains so you > can take 2.4 drivers and easily compile them for 2.2... but why is > that the benchmark? I can't take 2.4 drivers and do that, because I > want to support 2.0 as well, so I bite the bullet and make the > necessary changes for broader compatibility.
You can do 2.0 compat with kcompat. Just needs a couple more compat macros in kcompat tarball. I grant you that net drivers are much more resilient across kernel versions, and are easier to make portable across the various kernel API changes -- precisely because we've managed to keep the core interfaces fairly stable, logic- and locking-wise. SET_MODULE_OWNER is just one more piece of this conscious effort.
> So.. back to a point. Is 2.2 compilability (with the help of kcompat) > one of the goals to aim for in 2.5 drivers generally? Or is this > specifically meant for the network drivers which you support?
In general, the mainline kernel has two conflicting goals: * maintain source back-compat as long as it is reasonable * keep back-compat garbage to a minimum, eliminating it where possible
It really comes down to a maintainer decision, unless there is an overriding decision to purposefully break source back-compat.
To answer your question specifically, SET_MODULE_OWNER eases source back-compat in general, but it's main user is network drivers.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |