On 23.02.2017 08:32, Paul Goyette wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > >> I'm evaluating it from the osabi (pkgsrc term) point of view. I'm >> targeting LLDB for 7.99.62+. If the kernel bump approach is reserved for >> loadable kernel modules, I will follow this in future changes. > > Modules (and specifically, their interfaces to the rest of the kernel) > are only one reason for a kernel bump. > > Other reasons might include > > * changes to the contents of prop-libs that are passed between kernel > and userland, or kernel and modules > > * changes to structs that might be included in ioctl args > > * changes to things that kmem grovelers chase > > > New values for existing struct members or in enums generally wouldn't > need a bump, unless they're accompanied by other changes in data size or > content. > It's clear now, thank you! > And I'm sure that other folks can provide more reasons for having a > kernel bump. > > > > +------------------+--------------------------+------------------------+ > | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | > | (Retired) | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com | > | Kernel Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at netbsd.org | > +------------------+--------------------------+------------------------+
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature