From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC] ABI feature gates?
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:21:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFz5NNCE6JMHfoqKtxAFSPBKkGvaDQQ+bqMzySYr--an-w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87efslsj7w.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:00 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> wrote:
>
> I think this is primarily a social/communication issue. We need to know
> what is expected and what can be trusted. We need clear rules that
> everyone knows and that work for everyone. Currently we have (fairly)
> clear rules that work fairly well in many cases, but can be problematic.
>
> The rules, as you outline, are that users should not experience
> regressions from one released kernel to a subsequent released kernel.
> So people working on -rc kernels can expect to experience regressions.
> Also kernel devs are free to create theoretical regressions as long an
> no-one experiences them.
>
> My strawman is to suggest that we relax this.
No.
The whole "no regressions" is a hard rule, and it will remain so.
It's pretty much the only really hard rule we have, and I will
continue to insist on it.
There are no loopholes. No "but it's been only one release". No, no,
no. The whole point is that users are supposed to be able to *trust*
the kernel. If we do something, we keep on doing it.
And if it makes it harder to add new user-visible interfaces, then
that's a *good* thing.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-09 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-04 1:16 Andy Lutomirski
2017-08-04 1:30 ` Greg KH
2017-08-04 4:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-08-04 5:08 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-08-04 8:23 ` Daniel Vetter
2017-08-04 2:26 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-08-04 3:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-04 5:13 ` Julia Lawall
2017-08-04 14:20 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-08-04 15:47 ` Julia Lawall
2017-08-04 8:42 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-08-04 8:53 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-08-04 16:04 ` Greg KH
2017-08-04 17:14 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-08-04 17:53 ` Greg KH
2017-08-04 22:52 ` Joe Perches
2017-08-09 20:06 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-08-14 19:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-14 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 7:13 ` Julia Lawall
2017-08-04 8:57 ` Julia Lawall
2017-08-04 11:27 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-08-09 0:00 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-09 11:54 ` Laurent Pinchart
2017-08-14 20:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-09 20:21 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2017-08-11 6:21 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-11 6:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-11 8:02 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-11 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-14 4:19 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-14 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-14 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-14 23:23 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-08-15 0:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 16:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-08-15 18:26 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CA+55aFz5NNCE6JMHfoqKtxAFSPBKkGvaDQQ+bqMzySYr--an-w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox