Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] API replacement/deprecation

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>]

Em Fri, 07 Sep 2018 12:54:37 +0300
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> escreveu:

> On Fri, 07 Sep 2018, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
> > I came up with the following Coccinelle semantic patch.  The advantage is
> > that it can also give a hint as to what should be done.  The intent is
> > that it should be easily extensible.  
> 
> The only real downside that I can see is that it centralizes the
> deprecation information in the semantic patch instead of the functions
> themselves.

While both works, the __deprecated markup at the header looks
better for me, as it makes easier to check inside a header file
what's deprecated. Also, it helps avoiding conflicts.

Anyway, if we either use Coccinelle or __deprecated, I doubt that
most people will remember to add a:
	-D__deprecated=__attribute__((deprecated))
or to call a coccinelle script to do such checks, even if properly
documented.

IMHO, whatever solution, the best would be to have a makefile
target equivalent to allmodconfig and allyesconfig that would 
add such extra maintainership logic.



Thanks,
Mauro