From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D318B34CF9 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2025 06:40:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752475207; cv=none; b=clfLuYQAIF/1yGuEaWv7+LdQKobIJk2KjjrFUf4kl4OC3uw7+Orsw/5IFPu48xgO4h84ZNhuKtUcYGp2T4XSwZPDpmmGw4C52TYc+VAYX1OGjFXWy6dkFj2S6/XJX/uWi/MNmNbiafKs8aWyOrlpgpYLiBMILsaRXRPYYg9nLhQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752475207; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1G+kwyH3X7cE8z82gSsuHAyJpYLDzNzOUBJHf8Z+Jx0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SbCLqteIzNhSg07iMhN7QtENAVsfOJHWmh1LHr56iwEIXjfAVZOjLmc3fzhhufMAGO8AURgDbAfSgh7Jiq1/wV8FQcKHeDGzuctH41D+RpH4QAkiY/rT/FNUVvHvgtiDyiY7KnMWWu1A5I0W9vkyMKJP9QeXsXnWcp5lH5Fu/MA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=f9dvLXpI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="f9dvLXpI" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=1G+kwyH3X7cE8z82gSsuHAyJpYLDzNzOUBJHf8Z+Jx0=; b=f9dvLXpIZThFFBxO1y8DWCweIr D6ajTv0gdvlrk1jSfWhsezGfMXFyyo0+9SCej5SfolP/SdWzYsc9RUCpeTdqNc4fsiCNvWwJjhlJI PGDjbtk6/dSWhKFe2mPh8NXjSzkmPoXF2eRXBfU6F4nP+8KhCVUyH0768QkuSzH16stu+2VwQ+THN WU1OsimusAdIGiN23qYE8FBoVR48bhWWCWh+o2Os0MXjG8IpHQszjsFtChvrqq8u3WaLDUbHWp2jN NeyyjEVoNyYW90rh8Atw+NnwpExz8n5EEacbBkyrw/HIhrkHQU1ZCtdSQN2u/7zM35D5rtkJSboR1 ZmD7cM8A==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ubCr6-00000001NgH-03Yd; Mon, 14 Jul 2025 06:40:04 +0000 Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2025 23:40:03 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: dan.j.williams@intel.com Cc: Steven Rostedt , Greg KH , Christoph Hellwig , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf , Masami Hiramatsu , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Thomas Gleixner , Andrii Nakryiko , Indu Bhagat , "Jose E. Marchesi" , Beau Belgrave , Jens Remus , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] unwind: Export unwind_user symbol to GPL modules Message-ID: References: <20250709212556.32777-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20250709212556.32777-3-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20250711065742.00d6668b@gandalf.local.home> <2025071124-cola-slouching-9dd2@gregkh> <20250711100239.55434108@gandalf.local.home> <6871537ec0461_1d3d100c6@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6871537ec0461_1d3d100c6@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 11:10:06AM -0700, dan.j.williams@intel.com wrote: > It is odd to read this claimed benefit when viewing it from the wider > Linux kernel project. Upstream maintenance of ABI contracts is the > fundamental struggle of subsystems. The request, "can we get the kernel > out of the way and maintain our own ABI to our users?" is a consistent > refrain, and it consistently receives a qualified "no" for regression, > security, and other interface evolution concerns. Exactly.