[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH -mm] PM: add /sys/power documentation to Documentation/ABI
    On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 03:32:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > This ABI/ thing rather snuck under my radar (I saw it go past, but a lot of
    > things go past).

    It had a lot of review the first time around. The second and third had
    relatively little.

    > It'll be good if it works, but it is going to take quite a lot of thought,
    > effort and maintainer vigilance to be successful and to avoid becoming
    > rotware.

    I agree.

    > I wonder how hard it would be to write a script which parses a diff, works
    > out if it touches ABI things, complain if it doesn't alter
    > Documentation/ABI/*? Not very - it's just a matter of defining a suitable
    > regexp.

    That would be good to have.

    > What _should_ be documented in there, anyway?
    > - syscalls, obviously.
    > - /proc? If so, everything, or are there exceptions?
    > - /sys? If so, everything, or are there exceptions?
    > - ioctl numbers and payloads?
    > - netlink messages?
    > - ethtool thingies? netdev interface names? /proc/iomem identifiers?
    > module names? kernel-thread comm[] contents? The ABI is pretty fat.
    > scary.

    Yes, our ABI is scary. And yes, all of the above is needed to be
    documented if we want to have a handle on this thing.

    It is probably something that we can throw at the janitors list for the
    existing stuff to get some help.


    greg k-h
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-31 00:55    [W:0.021 / U:6.628 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site