RE: [PATCH 0/5] Add uv_sysfs platform driver

["Ernst, Justin" <justin.ernst@hpe.com>]

> Hi,
> 
> On 11/17/20 9:42 PM, Justin Ernst wrote:
> > Introduce a new platform driver to gather topology information from UV systems
> > and expose that information via a sysfs interface at /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/.
> >
> > Justin Ernst (5):
> >   x86/platform/uv: Remove existing /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/ interface
> >   x86/platform/uv: Add and export uv_bios_* functions
> >   x86/platform/uv: Add new uv_sysfs platform driver
> >   x86/platform/uv: Update ABI documentation of /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/
> >   x86/platform/uv: Update MAINTAINERS for uv_sysfs driver
> 
> So patch 1/1 drops the existing
> 
> /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/coherence_id
> /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/partition_id
> 
> sysfs API, then according to patch 4/5 patch 3/5 reintroduces
> the /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/partition_id API, but the /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/coherence_id
> file is gone for ever ?
> 
> I'm not sure what userspace bits (may) depend on this but without more info
> this looks like a clear violation of the do not break userspace APIs rule.
> 
> So, based on this, I have to nack this series in its current state.
> 
> Now if there is a strong believe there are 0 (not a few, but _zero_) users
> out there who rely on the /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/coherence_id file then this
> might be ok. But then there needs to be a technical analysis of why this is
> ok in the commit message of the patch dropping this sysfs file.
> 
> Also the commit message of patch 1/5 should mention that
> /sys/firmware/sgi_uv/partition_id will be re-introduced later through
> another driver.

Hello Hans,

I will resubmit these patches without the API breakage, reintroducing the coherence_id file in the new driver.

Thank you for taking the time to look over my patch set.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hans