Quoting r. Sean Hefty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: Re: librdmacm/ucma > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >In normal usage I expect we must not break the ABI, but should rather > >extend it - without breaking userspace. How do you extend the ABI? > >not by bumping the ABI revision? How does userspace find out > >whether kernel supports new features? > > If the ABI didn't break, can't userspace just make the call for the new > feature and check the return code?
Put another way - why do you already have backward compatibility hacks in lirdmacm? There wasn't any released version of cma, was there? -- MST _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
