[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgR_unCDRZ+8iTb5gBO6bgRkuS4JYBpi25v12Yp6TzWVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:24:05 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
"open list:NFS, SUNRPC, AND..." <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
linux-cachefs@...hat.com, CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@...il.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] fscache: Replace and remove old I/O API
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 9:21 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Call it "fallback" or "simple" or something that shows the intent, but
> no, I'm not taking patches that introduce a _new_ interface and call
> it "deprecated".
Put another way: to call something "deprecated", you have to already
have the replacement all ready to go.
And if you have that, then converting existing code to a deprecated
model isn't the way to go.
So in neither situation does it make any sense to convert anything to
a model that is deprecated.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists