[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v10 10/11] quota: Add proper versioning support to fs_quota_s

To: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 10/11] quota: Add proper versioning support to fs_quota_stat
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 17:18:32 +1000
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>, swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1373516161.4555.10.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1372371914-11370-1-git-send-email-sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> <1372371914-11370-11-git-send-email-sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> <20130710155538.GY20932@xxxxxxx> <20130710162602.GB32444@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1373489390.6020.30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20130711014501.GY3438@dastard> <1373516161.4555.10.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:16:01PM -0500, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 11:45 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > And to play Devil's advocate: it is way too late in the merge cycle
> > to make these sorts of ABI changes to a patch and test/review them
> > adequately.
> There is no ABI issues even in the earlier version, it was an API
> breakage.

Old binaries would have done the wrong thing - that's an ABI
issue. I'm sorry I didn't realise this earlier.

> And with Jan's suggestion even that API breakage is being
> fixed. There is no change in API or ABI. We are just adding a new
> interface.

Yes, we are adding a new API to avoid ABI problems with
re-interpreting the old API. 

But whether it's API or ABI, it doesn't matter - my point is that
it's almost 2 weeks after the merge window was opened and adding new
userspace APIs at the last moment before the merge window closes
tends to be frowned upon....

> Old code and old binary will work as before.

Yes, but we have no new code or binaries to test the new interface,
do we?


Dave Chinner

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>