On 2.5.2018 12:10, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> The only use case which I can think about is userspace sysfs >>> and then I would really like to know why these userspace >>> users cannot use the character device that is nowadays >>> supported by libgpiod and there is even patches for some >>> IoT libraries to use it. The character device makes the >>> GPIO Linux "base" irrelevant for userspace. >>> >>> GPIO sysfs is deprecated and moved to the obsolete ABI. >>> >>> If there are legacy applications that use this I would have >>> to consider it, but since this has been -1 since the driver >>> was merged I find that unlikely. >> >> Yes, it is about legacy application which I have seen recently and there >> is no source code for application calls it because board vendor doesn't >> provide it. >> >> You are right that -1 was used from the beginning in mainline but >> unfortunately this driver was in vendor tree for a while and it uses 0 >> there. >> >> In upstreaming this was changed to -1 but customers have a lot of code >> which developed against vendor tree and they want to use >> latest&greatest. And without this they are not able to run that >> applications. >> >> I found that this logic is already in 5 drivers in mainline that's why I >> send this patch to be +1. > > I see. > > Sadly comaptibility with out-of-tree driver code is none of our > (community) business. > > We do pay a lot of effort not to break the ABI to userspace, but > it needs to be an ABI coming from the mainline kernel, not from > a vendor tree. > > So to the mainline kernel this is no regression. I understand your statement. On the other hand it is feature which was permitted in past for some drivers and this is +1. Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html