From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 26 20:42:01 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93C016A4CE; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:42:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7772543D31; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:42:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iAQKjAib074995; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:45:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <41A79538.8000003@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:42:32 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040929 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff References: <200411261029.iAQATJHG003436@repoman.freebsd.org> <41A74A92.3090605@freebsd.org> <20041126203159.GB87167@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20041126203159.GB87167@cell.sick.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netgraph netgraph.h ng_base.c ng_source.c ng_uni_cust.hsrc/sys/netgraph/bluetooth/l2cap ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:42:02 -0000 Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 08:24:02AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > S> One of the stated goals for 5-STABLE was that we would retain API and > S> ABI stability except when absolutely neccessary when fixing bugs or > S> security holes. I know that we didn't explicitily name netgraph in > S> the list of 'stable' subsystems, but it was assumed to be part of > S> 'networking'. Can you please explain why this ABI change is required > S> for 5-STABLE? > > We are going to test netgraph(4) for mpsafeness soon. Without this change > it is impossible to turn netgraph ISR to MPSAFE. We are not going to enable > MPSAFE netgraph ISR in RELENG_5, but we want to bring RELENG_5 to a state, > when a small a 1-line patch enables MPSAFE ISR. In this case users running > RELENG_5 will have an easy opportunity to test. > > I'm afraid that CURRENT userbase does not run netgraph widely, and thus > we will not find resuorces for thourough testing. > > I understand all problems caused by API change, but we need this to go on. > > P.S. And only a small number of nodes affected. > I understand the desire for forward progress here, but we did declare API and ABI stability. Is there any way to achieve your goals and still keep backwards compatiblity? Maybe create a new interface that will be the default in 6.0, and allow 5.x to be the transition point to it? I'm going to ask that this be reverted otherwise. Scott