Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200922023151.387447-1-warthog618@gmail.com> <20200922023151.387447-14-warthog618@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200922023151.387447-14-warthog618@gmail.com>
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date:   Tue, 22 Sep 2020 09:49:11 +0200
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2S3YLgy001xB-xWib9kYkkQKgFmEEP1MGYFhvd2HZAXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 13/20] gpio: uapi: document uAPI v1 as deprecated
To:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:36 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:
>  /*
>   *  ABI v1
> + *
> + * This version of the ABI is deprecated and will be removed in the future.
> + * Use the latest version of the ABI, defined above, instead.
>   */

How intentional is the wording here? It seems unrealistic that the v1 ABI
would be removed any time soon if there are existing users and applications
cannot yet rely on v2 to be present in all kernels, so it sounds like a hollow
threat.

At the same time I can see that telling users it will be removed can lead to
them moving on to the new version more quickly, so maybe a hollow threat
is in fact appropriate here ;-)

      Arnd