From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC] ABI feature gates?
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 18:16:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUb0mJEdL48gq9K2RoqULuwgs==CeXRCNw9+3R2BwkXVw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
[Note: I'm not entirely sure I can make it to the kernel summit this
year, due to having a tiny person and tons of travel]
This may be highly controversial, but: there seems to be a weakness in
the kernel development model in the way that new ABI features become
stable. The current model is, roughly:
1. Someone writes the code. Maybe they cc linux-abi, maybe they don't.
2. People hopefully review the code.
3. A subsystem maintainer merges the code. They hope the ABI is right.
4. Linus gets a pull request. Linus probably doesn't review the ABI
for sanity, style, blatant bugs, etc. If Linus did, then he'd never
get anything else done.
5. The new ABI lands in -rc1.
6. If someone finds a problem or objects, it had better get fixed
before the next real release.
There's a few problems here. One is that the people who would really
review the ABI might not even notice until step 5 or 6 or so. Another
is that it takes some time for userspace to get experience with a new
ABI.
I'm wondering if there are other models that could work. I think it
would be nice for us to be able to land a kernel in Linus tree and
still wait a while before stabilizing it. Rust, for example, has a
strict policy for this that seems to work quite well.
Maybe we could pull something off where big new features hide behind a
named feature gate for a while. That feature gate can only be enabled
under some circumstances that make it very hard to mistake it for true
stability. (For example, maybe you *can't* enable feature gates on a
final kernel unless you manually patch something.)
Here are a few examples that come to mind for where this would have helped:
- Whatever that new RDMA socket type was that was deemed totally
broken but only just after it hit a real release.
- O_TMPFILE. I discovered that it corrupted filesystems in -rc6 or
-rc7. That got fixed, the the API is still a steaming pile of crap.
- Some cgroup+bpf stuff that got cleaned up in a -rc7 or so a few releases ago.
I'm sure there are tons more.
Is this too crazy, or is it worth discussing?
next reply other threads:[~2017-08-04 1:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-04 1:16 Andy Lutomirski [this message]
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
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='CALCETrUb0mJEdL48gq9K2RoqULuwgs==CeXRCNw9+3R2BwkXVw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/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