[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <167544421849.11975.17490109682248659493.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2023 17:10:18 +0000
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org
To: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org,
yhs@...a.com, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
toke@...hat.com, corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
brouer@...hat.com, bagasdotme@...il.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf/docs: Document kfunc lifecycle / stability
expectations
Hello:
This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 09:57:27 -0600 you wrote:
> BPF kernel <-> kernel API stability has been discussed at length over
> the last several weeks and months. Now that we've largely aligned over
> kfuncs being the way forward, and BPF helpers being considered
> functionally frozen, it's time to document the expectations for kfunc
> lifecycles and stability so that everyone (BPF users, kfunc developers,
> and maintainers) are all aligned, and have a crystal-clear understanding
> of the expectations surrounding kfuncs.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [bpf-next,v3] bpf/docs: Document kfunc lifecycle / stability expectations
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/16c294a6aad8
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists