[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46A00B48CC54E4468EF6911F877AC4CA018D73BB@blrx3m10.blr.amer.dell.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:52:26 +0530
From: <Shyam_Iyer@...l.com>
To: <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <kxie@...lsio.com>
Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <open-iscsi@...glegroups.com>,
<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<jgarzik@...ox.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
<swise@...ngridcomputing.com>, <rdreier@...co.com>,
<daisyc@...ibm.com>, <wenxiong@...ibm.com>, <bhua@...ibm.com>,
<divy@...lsio.com>, <dm@...lsio.com>, <leedom@...lsio.com>,
<kxie@...lsio.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/4 2.6.28] cxgb3i - cxgb3i iscsi driver
>Andrew Morton wrote:
> > + *
> > + * Written by: Karen Xie (kxie@...lsio.com) */
> > +
> > +#include "cxgb3i.h"
> > +
> > +#define DRV_MODULE_NAME "cxgb3i"
> > +#define DRV_MODULE_VERSION "1.0.0"
>I'd suggest that the version number just be removed. It becomes
meaningless (and often misleading) once a driver is in the mainline
kernel. People will >update the driver without changing the version
number. Code external to the driver but which affects it can change.
>The kernel version identifier is really the only way in whcih you and
your support people can reproduce a user's code.
> > +#define DRV_MODULE_RELDATE "May 1, 2008"
>Ditto.
It gives us a stick to ask vendors to maintain upstream versions of
driver code in the distros.
While we are at this. I believe that there is not much of a standard for
driver versioning. If we automatically get a driver version from the
kernel version then it solves both problems. Thoughts ??
Thanks,
Shyam
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists