linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] net: batman-adv: remove unneeded MODULE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1863144.usQuhbGJ8B@ripper>
Date:   Tue, 08 Dec 2020 10:55:57 +0100
From:   Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, mareklindner@...mailbox.ch, sw@...onwunderlich.de,
        a@...table.cc, marcel@...tmann.org, johan.hedberg@...il.com,
        roopa@...dia.com, nikolay@...dia.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, jmaloy@...hat.com,
        ying.xue@...driver.com, kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com,
        yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...omium.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Matthias Schiffer <mschiffer@...verse-factory.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] net: batman-adv: remove unneeded MODULE_VERSION() usage

On Tuesday, 8 December 2020 08:48:56 CET Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> > Is there some explanation besides an opinion? Some kind goal which you want to 
> > achieve with it maybe?
> 
> Just a cleanup. I've been under the impression that this version is just
> an relic from oot times.

There are various entities which are loving to use the distro kernel and 
replace the batman-adv module with a backport from a newer kernel version. 
Similar to what is done in OpenWrt for the wifi drivers.

> > At least for us it was an easy way to query the release cycle information via 
> > batctl. Which made it easier for us to roughly figure out what an reporter/
> > inquirer was using - independent of whether he is using the in-kernel version 
> > or a backported version.
> 
> Is the OOT scenario still valid ?

Since the backport is OOT - yes, it is still valid.

Kind regards,
	Sven
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)