From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD8EC3858404 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:20:39 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BD8EC3858404 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0279866.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 32ADovRc022695; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:20:17 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=qcppdkim1; bh=DgFVAoLAXA+pGzs1RTiR1tB9IOrskv07iltnwai5cWo=; b=WQU/imcXQkFIa9aussINsXMJYxmLwIk1g2n+l+bB0lFdprVqz2D5b6EnYW+pYKFsNAO5 NVW1l3jG+SO7x8S2KOZjYA+HA7rzoLRKemHlziOqFDa82nFrZCoKE67GXxRWw2M7qIbw 7JF2UyqQLjmMb6H5n77Unkw/3qhomWfyMuzVt1+5APFIPaTR02uD4Myli3UGlGhuaZnE W5EumhdOClxEuiAljdjI7cU+BE53UhjserXNj6BpV5MGht7N9oAjVP3YJn8uGL0/1kXY 0fTOOS5cAoC60G5i0qyI8vNYPSMtTC2wUHT2rqq3NdB2d6xt9dd6bMYG1i+zulS55nrG Mg== Received: from nasanppmta01.qualcomm.com (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3p7egym7p0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:20:17 +0000 Received: from nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com ([10.52.223.231]) by NASANPPMTA01.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 32AIKGD4013258 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:20:16 GMT Received: from [10.110.35.240] (10.80.80.8) by nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.986.41; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:20:15 -0800 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:20:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Validating UAPI backwards compatibility Content-Language: en-US To: Christoph Hellwig , John Moon CC: Masahiro Yamada , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , "Nicolas Schier" , , , , , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Randy Dunlap , "Arnd Bergmann" , Bjorn Andersson , Todd Kjos , Matthias Maennich , Giuliano Procida , , , Jordan Crouse , "Satya Durga Srinivasu Prabhala" , Elliot Berman References: <20230301075402.4578-1-quic_johmoo@quicinc.com> From: Trilok Soni In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8] X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) To nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-GUID: j8nBrDEWwr0u__8SclYtBFl6Esys8tp0 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: j8nBrDEWwr0u__8SclYtBFl6Esys8tp0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.942,Hydra:6.0.573,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-03-10_09,2023-03-10_01,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxlogscore=854 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2212070000 definitions=main-2303100146 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 3/10/2023 12:09 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:54:00PM -0800, John Moon wrote: >> Our goal is to add tooling for vendor driver developers because the >> upstream model of expert maintainer code review can be difficult to >> replicate in-house. Tools may help developers catch simple UAPI >> incompatibilities that could be easily overlooked by in-house review. > > Why would this matter in any way for the kernel? If you tool is useful > for in-kernel usage it should be added to the tree and documented as > such, but ouf of tree crap simply does not matter. This tool will be helpful for the kernel maintainers and reviewers as well if it can detect potential UAPI backward compatibilities. Even for the developers while changing UAPI interfaces at kernel.org before submission. John is trying to highlight also that this tool can be useful for downstream users who want to keep the UAPI backward compatibility like we do at upstream. We can remove the above text, since we would like to mainline it at kernel.org. ---Trilok Soni