From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 6 23:38:17 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A4B8B31; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:38:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mavbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-da0-f54.google.com (mail-da0-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B4E8FC0A; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:38:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-da0-f54.google.com with SMTP id z9so443695dad.13 for ; Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:38:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lvs8lFnutf52ga0+aNIXUm51vXOFXVg5ofZueMrZ5rI=; b=zV0p0fzF2Rr6G86PKlPAwA2HFmFXkgmMiCHoY5yBzJhT6LLOR5jX4qQ5Ii2LxxfUSd MnVwh9ikGb4QstQNMcn5wbCZzV8HgSN1fKBYTdmAB5onCRaFBOE9VMTfnA1HHi1C2cOs W5QabO64shrU3u3ga50qo1ut1P2WC9dJxgHucRhwYvjM5i7FlEhYHmRb1PyDbjSqd9eu PDkTwPOmQW+ZNMbNzusmv7g3+TaZsbK2B134oCDpEryLFYlE61TUKxrbvumadPUTt625 u0J9Bh/5LrLz8sCM7Y5ElNjwz8GEny9r2HDFtIpOu46RzNGUIrfs4A0SYenE4bgY9uyv 6ZWg== Received: by 10.66.86.165 with SMTP id q5mr917984paz.18.1352245096677; Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:38:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mavbook.mavhome.dp.ua (drawbridge.ixsystems.com. [206.40.55.65]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id tm8sm13041747pbc.48.2012.11.06.15.38.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:38:15 -0800 (PST) Sender: Alexander Motin Message-ID: <50999F66.1020402@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 01:38:14 +0200 From: Alexander Motin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120628 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: attilio@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r241896 - in head: . cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libzpool/common/sys share/man/man9 sys/cam/ctl sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/kern sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys sys/cddl/contrib/openso... References: <201210221750.q9MHot26061585@svn.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Konstantin Belousov , Ben Kaduk X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 23:38:17 -0000 On 07.11.2012 01:20, Attilio Rao wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Ben Kaduk wrote: >> I do not wish to belabor the point; we all have better things to do >> with our time. Hopefully this is my last message on the topic. >> >> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Attilio Rao wrote: >> >>> The point is that KPI/KBI of -CURRENT can change as long as >>> __FreeBSD_version is bumped (and if you really want to know my >>> opinion, I already see this as a forceful thing because it would not >>> be necessary in my mind, but I second the will of the majority of >>> developers). So, if the KPI/KBI changes all the thirdy part code, >>> ports and everything else must adapt. >> >> Yes, everything must adapt to changes in -current. I am arguing that, >> if it is easy to do so, we should make the user experience for >> *ordinary users* running -current as nice as possible. If we do not >> have ordinary users running current, then our code does not get >> real-world testing until RC builds, or even the .0 release. I think >> it is well-accepted that we want to have the code in -current get >> real-world testing; making the user experience nicer helps this to >> happen. To me, it seems that the user experience is nicer if the KPI >> change is delayed from the KBI change. We have mechanisms in place >> that can enforce __FreeBSD_Version of kernel modules must match the >> version of the running kernel, so I do not see how this procedure >> would lead to silent binary incompatibility. > > The courtesy you are mentioning here is the __FreeBSD_Version. Having > stricter rule would just meaning doing under-performing and unclean > job. > >> >>> MPSAFE flag is not any longer supported and code needs to be ported >>> appropriately to -CURRENT interface. >> >> That is the present state of affairs, yes. I am asking only, "think >> of the users; can we make things easier for them?". >> Maybe not in this case, but as something to keep in mind for the future. > > I can understand your concern, but people using -CURRENT must be well > aware of the fact that this is a development branch and they cannot > expect too many safety belt mechanisms to be in place. > > I think that the current model (break KBI/KPI at will, give > ports/thirdy part a way to recognize it via __FreeBSD_Version and move > on) is optimal because it doesn't limit the developer neither leaves > the user completely without a landmark on how to fix the problem. > > It is all balancing in finding compromises :) I would like to support Ben's position. We may not expect that all the world is tracking our development in real time and adapt to our changes at the same exact moment. As I understand, before this one change MPSAFE flag was mandatory to have. After that one change MPSAFE is missing and so must to be removed. Yes, in perspective that part of code in external sources will be wrapped with respective ifdef's, but could we give world some time window to adapt, leaving constant doing nothing in tree? What is the price of having single define, comparing to headache even for one user who was brave enough to run HEAD? -- Alexander Motin