Le mercredi 19 juin 2024 à 13:56 +0200, Markus Elfring a écrit :
…
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/219abc43b4fdd4a13b307ed2efaa0e6869e68e3f.c...
(and responses below)
It's more nuanced than I remembered.
…
- Will the desire grow for further collateral evolution according
to affected software components?
Not sure what you mean by that.
Advanced programming interfaces were added a while ago.
Example: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc4/source/include/linux/cleanup.h#L8
Corresponding attempts for increasing API usage need to adapt to remaining change reluctance, don't they?
Sure, I guess.
But that does not change the fact that I cannot use cleanup.h magic in this patchset, yet, as the required changes would have to be done in a separate one.
Cheers, -Paul
On Wed, 2024-06-19 at 14:21 +0200, Paul Cercueil wrote:
Le mercredi 19 juin 2024 à 13:56 +0200, Markus Elfring a écrit :
…
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/219abc43b4fdd4a13b307ed2efaa0e6869e68e3f.c...
(and responses below)
It's more nuanced than I remembered.
…
- Will the desire grow for further collateral evolution according
to affected software components?
Not sure what you mean by that.
Advanced programming interfaces were added a while ago.
Example: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc4/source/include/linux/cleanup.h#L8
Corresponding attempts for increasing API usage need to adapt to remaining change reluctance, don't they?
Sure, I guess.
But that does not change the fact that I cannot use cleanup.h magic in this patchset, yet, as the required changes would have to be done in a separate one.
Not to speak on the added churn in doing that now. This is already v11 and complicated enough for us to add another dependency.
Moreover, yes, cleanup stuff is very nice but if some interface/API does not support it, it's not up to the developer using that interface/API on some other patch series to add support for it.
- Nuno Sá
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
-
Nuno Sá -
Paul Cercueil