From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 23:32:45 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Leon Romanovsky Message-ID: <20170625213245.ep555qmzwbl4kjpq@piout.net> References: <20170625072423.GR1248@mtr-leonro.local> <20170625181954.GU1248@mtr-leonro.local> <20170625190529.GV1248@mtr-leonro.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170625190529.GV1248@mtr-leonro.local> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Driver and/or module versions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On 25/06/2017 at 22:05:29 +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:37:12AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > > Great, so why are we continuing to allow patches with MODULE_VERSION and > > > DRIVER_VERSION changes? > > > > I suspect they just haven't caused problems elsewhere. > > > > And honestly, they aren't that common. Grepping for MODULE_VERSION and > > DRIVER_VERSION shows more than I would like, but we're talking > > hundreds, not thousands (and lots of them are basically dead, stale > > code - ATA etc, or just joke names - usb). > > I see it differently, from my point of view, it is pretty active, > especially in the subsystems where new drivers are added more often, > but if you say that the policy exists, it is enough for me. > A while ago, I went and removed all of them from the RTC subsystem. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com