Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/11] staging: pi433: Rename enum optionOnOff in
 rf69_enum.h
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Simon_Sandstr=c3=b6m?= <simon@nikanor.nu>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux@Wolf-Entwicklungen.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20171205220849.5486-1-simon@nikanor.nu>
 <20171205220849.5486-5-simon@nikanor.nu>
 <4c89dc10-ccce-7760-f806-3a19c3edf743@smarthome-wolf.de>
 <20171206100833.3ficksukt6xaazl4@mwanda>
 <2ebc402d-f2af-40cb-7aa2-c9f062a0dd3d@smarthome-wolf.de>
 <20171206104414.xv2yqldf5xjovxxr@mwanda>
 <20171206195742.my5huetlwqk7bbqb@kappa.nikanor.nu>
From: Marcus Wolf <marcus.wolf@smarthome-wolf.de>
Message-ID: <77e2eeac-4f80-82f7-d7e2-fe52d3ea7e3e@smarthome-wolf.de>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 00:17:32 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171206195742.my5huetlwqk7bbqb@kappa.nikanor.nu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: de-DE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1728
Lines: 60


Am 06.12.2017 um 21:57 schrieb Simon Sandström:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 01:44:14PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:31:31PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 06.12.2017 um 12:23 schrieb Dan Carpenter:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wow...  This was the one patch I thought was going to sink this
>>>> patchset...
>>>
>>> I don't get that. What do you mean?
>>>
>>>> Isn't enum optionOnOff part of the userspace headers?
>>>>
>>>> I thought we weren't allowed to change that.
>>>
>>> All enums are for user space (or inteded to be used in userspace in future).
>>> Didn't introduce enums for internal use.
>>
>> So what I'm asking is if we do this change, does it break any userspace
>> programs which are used *right now*.  In other words will programs stop
>> compiling because we've renamed an enum?
>>
>> regards,
>> dan carpenter
>>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm not sure about this so I have to ask: wouldn't the header need to be
> in include/uapi/ for userspace to use them? Or is it "allowed" for
> userspace programs to use this internal header? Or are we afraid to
> break userspace programs that keeps a copy of pi433_if.h?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Simon
> 

Hi Simon,

in principle, I think you are right. With my first patch, offering the 
driver I did it that way, but Greg asked me to migrate everything 
(including docu) into staging/pi433. I think, that's related to being in 
staging.
At the moment, I copy pi433_if.h and rf69_enum.h to my userspace 
program, in order to be able to compile it.

To be honest, I am a little bit astonished about that question. Don't 
you do a regression test after such a redesign? I would be a little bit 
afraid to offer such redesign without testing.


Regards,
Marcus