On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 09:21:16AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Johan Hovold <jo...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 04:12:35PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> >> What? If I wanted a stable interface I would use sysfs and document
> >> the ABI in Documentation/ABI/*.
> >>
> >> debugfs is not ABI.
> >
> > As I mentioned in my response to Grygorii, not everyone -- and most
> > notably apparently not even Linus Torvalds -- agrees on this:
>
> Yeah I was sloppy I guess.
>
> What I mean, precisely is that sysfs is ABI, whether documented or
> not.
>
> Even debugfs is actually blurry, as per
> Documentation/filesystems/debugfs.txt:
>
> "The debugfs filesystem is also intended to not serve as a stable
> ABI to user space; in theory, there are no stability constraints placed on
> files exported there. The real world is not always so simple, though [1];
> even debugfs interfaces are best designed with the idea that they will need
> to be maintained forever."
>
> But I haven't been bitten by it yet so that's why I allow some poetic
> license.
Yes, and the [1] reference in that quote is the LWN article I referred
to.
I also see you already "broke" that ABI in a similar way in 2013 with
d468bf9ecaab ("gpio: add API to be strict about GPIO IRQ usage") by
adding the IRQ field.
Your call. :)
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
