From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1755639AbZKTUyH@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755639AbZKTUyH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:54:07 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755330AbZKTUyG
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:54:06 -0500
Received: from mail-iw0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:48564 "EHLO
	mail-iw0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754974AbZKTUyF (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:54:05 -0500
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=R16CXCaJE5+x5ubVBLgpXAct500sRuoOj/AmiEgc+TCyKzvCEt/cWQDWY2dQ9maNCe
         ap6AHcF6dV+072g+gxvGyelhikPG8mlKU4fTOs8J1Jz5gZQpH5ywc6cDFbA3h6P0/kk7
         oSbSh1RO3Znh75B+9f8mgS5dvn1Lh2k1Qo/yU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <43e72e890911201251t6210ee19n177eaf003a4fffc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <43e72e890911201245r4de5b039hb2dd5011dabf2399@mail.gmail.com> 
	<43e72e890911201251t6210ee19n177eaf003a4fffc@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:53:51 -0800
Message-ID: <43e72e890911201253obc466c8k2102e04457c48c92@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A generic kernel compatibilty code
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Everyone and their mother reinvents the wheel when it comes to
>> backporting kernel modules. It a painful job and it seems to me an
>> alternative is possible. If we can write generic compatibilty code for
>> a new routine introduced on the next kernel how about just merging it
>> to the kernel under some generic compat module. This would be
>> completey ignored by everyone using the stable kernel but can be
>> copied by anyone doing backport work.
>>
>> So I'm thinking something as simple as a generic compat/comat.ko with
>> compat-2.6.32.[ch] files.
>
> FWIW, I meant a compat-2.6.32.[ch] and compat-2.6.31.[ch] and so on.
> All these would link to the compat.ko

I supose this could juse be a separate tree with some generic
compat.ko module. That might work better.

  Luis