| |||||||||||||
Driver API anyone?Driver API anyone?Posted Jun 21, 2007 21:46 UTC (Thu) by arjan (subscriber, #36785)In reply to: Driver API anyone? by davecb Parent article: Long-term support and backport risk
this sounds easy...
but once you need to include locking rules (as any in-kernel API has).. it gets a HECK of a lot more tricky. You end up with a WAAY too bloated kernel, or you get translations layers...
(Log in to post comments)
Driver API anyone? Posted Jun 22, 2007 7:19 UTC (Fri) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link] Something like that could work (at least, I imagine it could :) ) if the API/ABI numbers applied to subsystems (e.g. the wireless extensions) and not to single functions. You would need at least two version numbers - the current one and the last one with which the current is backwards compatible. It would probably be more of an "ease the transistion pain" measure though, as I can't see the kernel developers being happy to keep maintaining older APIs once they started needing too much code of their own.
Driver API anyone? Posted Jun 22, 2007 14:28 UTC (Fri) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link] In practice, we only maintained one older version for anythingin development, but froze anything we gave to end-user customers. Since this is a **kernel** api we're talking about, I wouldn't keep more tan one "old" version.
The Multicians never seemed to get more than one old version,
--dave
|
|||||||||||||