[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfmpSf8B5zyk9Y-0zGEOtH-03dn7UfXd12QjkBXxhsT5SV9bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:52:32 -0400
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Thomas Davis <tadavis@....gov>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/5] bonding: rename slave to link where possible
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:51 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 01:23:17 +0200
>
> > Even if the module parameters are deprecated and extremely inconvenient
> > as a mean of bonding configuration, I would say changing their names
> > would still count as "breaking the userspace".
>
> I totally agree.
>
> Anything user facing has to be kept around for the deprecation period,
> and that includes module parameters.
Apologies, that was a definite oversight on my part, can add them back
via similar means as num_grat_arp and num_unsol_na use currently.
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod@...hat.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists