linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 29/29] arm64: dts: qcom: Harmonize DWC USB3 DT nodes name

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

Date:   Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:17:30 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux USB List <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/29] arm64: dts: qcom: Harmonize DWC USB3 DT nodes name

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 12:54:51AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> I always thought that ABI is supposed to be something what is
> thoroughly documented and firmly declared to be so. It isn't something
> claimed to be on a random nature but defined to be one when it's
> more-or-less standardized. Thus the Linux kernel developers decide not
> to change something unless it went through the series of iterations like
> testing, stable, obsolete, remove. As I see it the rule-of-thumb is
> supposed to be as "nothing is ABI unless it's declared as such".

Not true at all.  Again, if something works in an older kernel version,
and you upgrade to a new kernel version and it breaks, that is a
regression and must be fixed/reverted.

Lack of documentation does not mean an ABI can be changed.

greg k-h