On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 08:04, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:33:11 +0200 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > If the hardware isn't > > > + enabled by default or under development, > > > > Wondering if it might be better to drop the "or under development", as > > the "enabled by default" is the main part afaics. Maybe something like > > "If support for the hardware is normally inactive (e.g. has to be > > enabled manually by a kernel parameter)" would be better anyway. > > It's a tricky one, I'd say something like you can break the FW ABI > "until HW becomes available for public consumption" or such. > I'm guessing what we're after is letting people break the compatibility > in early stages of the product development cycles. Pre-silicon and > bring up, but not after there are products on the market? I'll stick with enabled by default I think, "public consumption" invites efforts to describe corners of the cloud or other places where hw has shipped but is not technically "public", Dave.
